^^^  PRINCETON.  N.  J.  ^ 


Library  of  Br,  A.  A.  Hodge.     Presented. 


Division 
Section,,, 
Ntimber 


..:E>.S..:Z.6^5 

.„.Sr.,.C..b.(C. 


THE 


REVELATION  OF  JOHN 


ITS 


OWN  INTEEPRETER 


IN   VIRTUE    OF 


THE  DOUBLE  VEESIOK" 


IN  WHICH   IT    IS   DELIVERED. 


BY 

JOHN  COCHRAN. 


NEW  YORK : 

D.  APPLETON  (t  COMPANY,  443  &  445  BROADWAY. 

1860, 


Entered,  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  tho  year  1S60,  by 

JOHN  F.  TROW, 

In  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  for  the  Southern  District  of  New  York. 


PEEFACE. 


If  the  author  succeeds  in  presenting  to  the  Chris- 
tian world  for  its  decision  the  question,  whether  the 
prophecy  of  the  Revelation  be  double  or  not,  he  will 
regard  his  labors  as  eminently  successfal.  He  believes 
this  question  will  be  answered  in  the  affirmative; 
and  its  answer  in  the  affirmative  will  be  a  matter  of 
no  small  consequence.  That  its  bearing  on  the  in- 
terpretation of  the  book  will  be  productive  of  the 
best  results,  is  apparent  to  every  one.  If  John  has 
delivered  his  prophecy  in  two  versions,  containing 
each  two  sets  of  symbols  precisely  correspondent  in 
significance,  the  prophet  is  evidently,  to  a  very  great 
extent,  his  own  interpreter.  That  he  is  the  best  of  all 
interpreters,  few  will  doubt.  The  question  itself  as  to 
the  existence  of  a  Double  Yeksion  is  evidently  one 
which  lies  at  the  very  threshhold  of  the  interpretation 
of  the  book ;  and  as  it  now  asks  for  a  fair  hearing,  it 
will  certainly  receive  it  from  those — and  ought  not 
the  number  to  comprehend  all  Christians — who  are  in- 
terested in  "  the  sayings  of  the  prophecy  of  this  book." 


CONTENTS 


SECTION  I. 

FIRST  REPEESEXTATIOX  OF  THE  ALLEGORY. 


CHAPTER  I. 

Page 
Literal,  Figurative,  and  Symbolical  Language,      ,         ,         ,         .       1 


CHAPTER  11. 
The  Difference  between  Allegory  and  Figure,       ....      6 

CHAPTER  III. 

Allegorical  or  Symbolical  Language  is  Enigmatical,       .         .        .24 

CHAPTER  lY. 

Unity  of  Idea  a  Fundamental  Principle  of  the  Allegory,        .         .     3*7 
Table  of  Parables, 49 

CHAPTER  Y.- 

Relations  of  the  SymboHc  Language  to  a  Prophetic  Allegory,        .     50 

CHAPTER  YI. 

Definitiveness  of  the  Sense  of  the  Prophetic  Allegory,  .         .     81 


VI  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  Yll. 

Page 
The  first  Step  to  understand  a  Prophetic  Allegory,  is  to  under- 
stand the  first  Representation, 106 

CHAPTER  VIII. 
Law  of  Unity  of  Design, 115 

CHAPTER  IX. 
Law  of  the  Double  Allegory, 124 

CHAPTER  X. 

Law  of  the  Quaternal  Structure,  or  the  Fourfold  Form,         .         .  137 

CHAPTER  XL 
The  double  Allegory  of  the  Revelation,  exhibiting  Unity  of  Design 
and  Quaternal  Structure, 145 


SECTIO]^   II. 
SECOl^D  REPEESENTATIOK  OF  THE  ALLEGORY. 

CHAPTER  L 

Key  to  the  Second  and  Real  Sense  of  a  Prophetic  Allegory,  .  181 

CHAPTER  IL 

Circumstances  connected  with  the  delivery  of  the  Allegory,  which 
tend  to  suggest  the  Second  Sense, 184 

CHAPTER  III. 

Special  Feature  in  the  Structure  of  the  Prophecy,  .         .         .  194 

The  compound  Symbol  the  Four  and  Twenty  Elders  and  the 

Four  Living-creatures, 196 

Office  of  the  Living-creatures  as  Heralds  of  the  Subject,     .  215 


CONTENTS.  Vll 


CHAPTER  IV. 

PAGE 

Partial  Developments  of  the  Second  Sense  in  the  form  of  Inter- 
pretations rendered,  ...  ....  2-13 


CHAPTER  V. 
The  Symbol  Satan, 253 


COKCLUSIOK 

The  Double  Allegory  in  its  Second  and  Real  Sense,  or  Plan  and 

Design  of  the  Revelation, 302 

Chart  of  the  Prophecy, 351 

Synoptical  View  of  the  Interpretation, 353 


SECTION  I. 

FIRST  REPRESENTATION  OF  THE  ALLEGORY. 


CHAPTER  I. 

LITERAL,    FIGTJRATIYE,    AND    SYMBOLICAL   LANGUAGE. 

The  transmission  of  ideas  from  one  mind  to  another 
is  made  through  the  medium  of  signs.  Signs  are  of 
two  kinds  :  thej  are  simple  or  complex,  direct  or  in- 
direct. A  simple  or  direct  sign  is  that  which  stands 
for  the  idea  to  be  communicated  simply,  and  which 
transmits  this  directly  to  the  mind.  The  words  of 
language  taken  in  their  literal  acceptation  are  signs 
of  this  kind.  These  signs  are  all  constructed  npon 
the  basis  of  a  presumed  identity  subsisting  between 
the  sign  and  the  idea  to  be  communicated.  Language, 
to  be  literally  taken,  consists  of  these  direct  signs. 

It  is  found,  however,  by  experience  that  signs  of 
this  description  are  altogether  incompetent  to  convey 
the  multitudinous  and  multiform  ideas  of  the  human 
mind.  These  may  be  reckoned  in  millions ;  direct 
signs  can  at  the  most  be  numbered  in  thousands. 
Accordingly  the  mind  has  devised  another  expedient 
1 


2  LITEEAL,    riGUrvATIVE,    AND 

for  tlie  transmission  of  ideas.  It  presses  ideas  them- 
selves into  the  service,  and  causes  one  idea  to  stand 
for  another.  Here  is  a  complex  or  indirect  sign,  and 
of  these,  figurative  or  ideographic  language  consists. 

To  illustrate  the  mental  process  at  work  in  the 
construction  of  these  indirect  or  complex  signs,  take 
the  following  example  :  I  wish  to  convey  to  the  mind 
of  a  man  who  had  never  witnessed  the  sight,  the  idea 
of  a  ship  moving  through  the  water.  I  feel  conscious 
that  there  are  no  direct  signs,  that  is,  that  language 
in  its  literal  acceptation  is  incompetent  to  transmit 
the  conception  from  my  own  mind  to  his  with  fulness 
and  fidelity.  I  find,  however,  that  by  the  substitution 
of  another  idea  for  the  one  I  would  convey,  I  can 
accomplish  it.  I  substitute  for  the  idea,  of  a  ship  mov- 
ing through  the  ocean,  the  idea  of  a  plough  moving 
through  a  field,  and  tell  him  "  the  ship  ploughed  the 
sea."  Through  the  medium  of  this  indirect  sign  I 
convey  to  him  the  idea  desired  with  infinitely  greater 
facility  and  infinitely  greater  precision  than  I  could 
have  done  by  any  direct  sign  or  by  employing  any 
number  of  them. 

ITow,  in  the  above  instance,  the  process  of  mind 
in  the  construction  of  the  indirect  sign,  is  a  double 
one  ;  there  are  two  ideas  concerned  in  the  operation  ; 
there  is  the  idea  of  the  ploughing  of  the  land  and  the 
idea  of  the  ploughing  of  the  sea.  The  sign  is  thus  a 
complex  sign,  and  the  operation  which  the  mind  23er- 
forms  in  arriving  at  the  thing  signified,  is  a  complex 
operation.  The  signs  of  literal  language  are  simple  ; 
of  figurative  language,  double. 


SYMBOLICAL  LANGUAGE.  3 

A  sign  can  never  be  a  medium  of  commmiication, 
unless  it  represent  tlie  same  idea  as  that  desired  to  be 
communicated.  The  basis,  therefore,  on  which  all 
signs  rest,  whether  these  be  literal  or  figurative,  is 
identity.  The  sign  represents  the  same  thing  as  tliat 
whicli  is  signified.  But  the  literal  sign  does  this 
directly  ;  an  ideographic  sign  does  it  indirectly^  and 
through  the  medium  of  a  complex  operation  which 
the  mind  has  to  perform.  This  operation  it  has  to 
make  ere  it  arrives  at  the  thing  signified. 

It  has  to  proceed  to  the  identity  which  every  sign 
must  establish  between  itself  and  the  thino;  signified 
by  a  somewhat  circuitous  route — by  the  route,  namely, 
of  analogy.  One  idea  is  taken  to  represent  another, 
not  because  it  is  the  same,  but  because  it  is  like  this 
other.  But  in  every  analogy  there  is  an  element  of 
identity.  It  is  on  this  that  the  truth  of  the  indirect 
sign  rests.  There  is  at  the  same  time,  however,  an 
element  of  difference,  which  is  either  comparatively 
great  or  small.  Hence  arises  a  complex  operation. 
If  this  difference,  which  subsists  between  the  one  idea 
and  the  other  be  not  correctly  subtracted,  an  untrue 
idea  will  be  transmitted.  Let  it  be  supposed,  for  ex- 
ample, that  in  the  instance  of  figurative  language 
which  we  have  above  quoted,  no  account  is  taken  of 
the  actual  difference  between  a  ship  and  a  plough, 
and  land  and  water ;  a  conception  altogether  erroneous 
will  be  formed.  Let  the  difference  be  taken  into  ac- 
count and  the  identity  which  really  exists  be  founded 
upon,  and  the  true  idea  will  be  presented  to  the  mind 
intended  to  be  expressed,  which  was,  that  the  ship 


4:  LITERAL,    FIGURATIVE,    AND 

moves  tlirongli  tlie  sea  in  the  same  manner  as  the 
plough  through  the  land,  subtracting  the  difference 
between  ship  and  plough,  sea  and  land.  In  the  pro- 
duction of  the  figure  there  is  always  a  process  of  com- 
parison involved.  If  this  is  not  duly  performed,  the 
figure  in  its  true  significancy  is  not  understood.  The 
basis  of  indirect  signs  or  figurative  language,  is  then 
analogy.  The  analogy,  however,  must  be  so  stated 
that  it  resolves  itself  into  an  identity,  else  the  sign 
were  no  sign.  !N"ow  as  ideas  of  analogy  may  be  mul- 
tiplied to  an  almost  infinite  extent,  the  amount  of  in- 
direct signs  or  figurative  language  placed  at  the  dis- 
posal of  the  mind  for  the  transmission  of  its  ideas,  may 
nearly  be  regarded  as  boundless.  The  mind,  by  lay- 
ing hold  on  ideas  to  convey  ideas,  obtains  a  capital 
in  signs  which  is  inexhaustible. 

These  two  species  of  signs  constituting  literal  and 
figurative  language,  are  used  for  the  same  object. 
They  are  employed  to  convey  ideas  from  one  mind  to 
another  with  as  much  clearness,  fidelity,  and  rapidity, 
as  possible.  When  literal  language  fails  in  accom- 
plishing this  result,  the  boundless  resources  of  figu- 
rative language  are  called  into  requisition. 

But  there  is  a  third  language  employed  in  Scrip- 
ture, the  object  of  which  is  entirely  different  from 
tliis.  This  is  the  allegoric,  or  symbolic,  language. 
The  object  of  this  is  not  to  convey  ideas  from  mind 
to  mind  with  rapid  clearness,  but  to  convey  them 
with  slow  clearness. 

It  employs,  like  figurative  language,  ideographic 
signs,  but  with  this  difference,  that  it  presents  to  the 


SYMBOLICAL  LANGUAGE.  5 

mind  only  one-lialf  the  double  sign,  leaving  the  mind 
to  snp])ly  for  itself  the  other  half  by  a  process  of 
search.  It  is  designed  undoubtedly  to  be  understood, 
and  for  this  end  it  is  constructed  with  extreme  pre- 
cision and  deiiniteness,  but  its  precision  and  definite- 
ness  are  concealed. 

It  behoves  us  to  scan  this  peculiar  language 
closely,  for  it  is  in  it  that  the  prophecy  of  the  Reve- 
lation is  cast. 


CIIAPTEE  II. 

THE  DIFFEKENCE  BETWEEN  ALLEGOKY  AND  FIGUKE. 

The  symbolic  language,  or,  as  it  may  be  called, 
the  enigmatical  language  of  Scripture,  is  a  'peculiar 
hind  of  ideograpliic  language,  which  may  be  regarded 
as  the  generic  term.  Like  figurative,  the  symbolic 
contains  signs  which  represent  one  idea  by  another. 
The  difference  between  them  lies  in  the  difference 
between  allegory  and  figure.  It  will  be  necessary, 
accordingly,  to  define  these  two  kinds  of  ideographic 
signs  with  precision,  in  order  to  obtain  a  clear  con- 
ception of  what  symbolic  or  allegoric  is,  as  compared 
with  figurative  or  metaphorical  language. 

It  is  apparent,  from  what  has  been  already  said, 
that  in  the  construction  of  the  complex  or  indirect 
signs  which  compose  ideographic  language,  there  is  a 
double  process  involved.  The  idea  desired  to  be 
communicated  is  transferred  to  the  mind  through  tlie 
medium  of  another^  and  the  communication  is  effect- 
ed through  a  double  operation.  It  is  accordingly 
necessary,  in  order  to  obtain  a  perfect  transfusion  of 
thought,  that  both  the  ideas  concerned  in  the  process 
be  appreliended.  JSTow  one  of  these  ideas  may  jDrop- 
erly  be  called  the  pictui'ing  idea ;  the  other  may  be 
termed  the  pictured. 


ALLEGORY   AND   FIGURE. 


To  elucidate  this  let  us  take  the  following  ex- 
am])le  :  wlieii  Christ  says,  "  I  am  tlie  door,"  the  door 
taken  literally  is  the  j^ictnring  idea,  and  the  door 
understood  figuratively,  is  the  pictured  idea.  To 
understand  Christ's  meaning  fully,  we  must  thorough- 
ly comprehend  what  a  door  means  in  the  literal  or 
picturing  sense,  and  what  it  signifies  in  the  figura- 
tive or  pictured  sense. 

Now  it  is  in  their  different  relationship  to  this  du- 
plex representation,  that  the  real  difference  lies  be- 
tween allegory  and  figure.  Allegory  has  only  to  do  with 
the  first  part  of  the  representation  made  ;  figure  has 
to  do  with  both.  The  allegor}^  in  the  strict  sense  of 
the  term,  expresses  nothing  more  than  the  first,  or 
picturing  idea,  or  set  of  ideas,  as  it  may  be.  It  pre- 
sents this  to  the  mind  for  its  contemplation.  It  thus, 
in  the  above  instance,  simply  places  the  first  idea, 
''  the  door,"  before  the  mind,  without  drawing  the 
connection  between  it  and  the  second  idea,  "  Christ." 
The  former  idea  is  no  doubt  designed  to  bring  out  the 
second,  but  it  is  no  part  of  the  allegory  to  perform 
this  development ;  on  the  contrary,  it  is  its  part  to 
conceal  it,  either  wholly  or  partially.  The  figure,  on 
the  other  hand,  presents  both  to  the  mind  at  once,  but 
its  chief  purpose  is  to  bring  out  into  strong  relief  the 
second,  or  pictured,  or  in  other  words,  the  real  idea. 

Thus  the  words  of  Christ  already  quoted  are  not 
allegorical.  They  form  a  figure,  because,  when  Christ 
affirms  that  he  is  the  door,  the  pictured,  or  second 
idea,  is  clearly  developed.  The  mind  rests  not  in  the 
first  representation,  but  presses  forward  to  the  second, 


8  ALLEGOEY   A^D   FIGUKE. 

whicli  presents  to  it  the  idea  that  the  door  is  an  image 
or  picture  of  Christ. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  parable  itself  of  which 
these  words  constitute  part  of  the  inter2)retation, 
affords  an  example  of  the  allegory  in  its  nearly  pure 
state ;  John  x.  1 — 5.  The  picture,  which  is  as  con- 
cise as  it  is  beautiful,  is  fully  drawn  out  of  a  sheep- 
fold  and  a  door  to  it,  which  picture  is  designed  to 
convey  to  the  mind  the  idea  that  Christ  is  the  only 
Saviour.  The  first  representation  is  here  developed 
in  an  extended  form  ;  it  is  kept  apart  from  the  second, 
which  lies  wholly  concealed  from  view,  and  it  forms 
what  may  be  regarded  as  a  perfect  allegory. 

The  Jews  were  unable  to  discover  the  real  sense 
of  this  parable  or  allegory  ;  that  is,  they  were  unable 
to  develop  for  themselves  the  second  idea,  which  it 
was  designed  to  picture  forth.  Christ  makes  the  de- 
velopment for  them,  and  in  doing  this,  in  the  words 
*'  I  am  the  door,"  he  reduces  the  allegory  to  a  figure. 
He  conducts  them  from  the  first  to  the  second  repre- 
sentation, and  by  constructing  the  bridge  of  con- 
nection between  the  two,  he  converts  the  allegory 
into  a  figure. 

An  allegory  accordingly  may  be  defined  to  be  an 
unapplied  and  uninterpreted  figure ;  a  figure  to  be 
an  applied  and  interpreted  allegory.  Every  allegory 
may  be  made  a  figure,  and  is  designed  ultimately  to 
become  one ;  every  figure  may  be  made  an  allegory 
by  withholding  the  second  idea. 

It  follows  from  the  distinction  which  has  been 
above  developed  between  allegory  and  figure,  that 


ALLEGOEY   AND   FIGURE.  9 

the  etymologj  of  tlie  T^'orcl  allegory,  wliicli  comes 
from  the  Greek  aWTjyopevco^  to  sjyeah  othcrioise^  ex- 
presses its  meaning  with  perfect  correctness.  When 
a  person  speaks  in  allegory,  he  speaks  otherwise  than 
he  means,  becanse  he  presents  one  first  representa- 
tion to  the  mind,  whicli  is  designed  indeed  to  bring 
ont  a  second  and  real  sense  ;  but  this  is  not  apparent 
nntil  the  second  representation  is  developed.  This 
essential  part  of  the  sign  is  kept  out  of  view  by  the 
allegory  either  wholly  or  in  j^ai't,  for  its  office  is  to 
sjyeah  otherioise.  The  figure,  on  the  other  hand, 
presents  this  second  representation  to  the  mind  at 
once  for  its  contemplation,  because  its  characteristic 
is  to  develop  all  that  it  means.  A  figure  conse- 
quently needs  no  interpretation  ;  an  allegory  always 
requires  one. 

AYe  thus  see  that  while  allegory  and  figure  are 
both  ideographic  signs  and  are  convertible  into  each 
other,  they  are  very  difi'erent.  An  allegory  reveals 
only  one  of  the  two  ideas  which  are  necessary  to  the 
construction  of  the  sign,  while  the  figure  reveals  both. 
An  allegory  is  thus  a  cryptogramic  sign,  while  a 
figure  has  all  the  openness  of  the  signs  of  literal  lan- 
guage. An  allegory  is  the  rude  or  fundamental  form 
of  the  sign,  and  that  form  to  which  every  figure  is 
reduced,  when  it  is  analyzed.  "When  we  probe  a 
figure  to  the  bottom,  we  necessarily  resolve  it  into 
the  two  ideas  of  which  it  consists,  and  we  subject  each 
of  these  to  a  distinct  examination.  We  here  find  the 
allegory.  Thus  when  we  analyze  the  figure  which 
has  been  taken  for  an  example,  "  the  ship  ploughs 
1* 


10  ALLEGOKY   AND   FIGURE. 

the  sea,''  we  separate  the  two  ideas  of  whicli  it  con- 
sists, and  we  find  them  to  be  these  :  a  i:>lough  moves 
over  the  land,  a  ship  moves  through  the  waters.  The 
expression  of  the  first  of  these  two  ideas,  apart  and 
by  itself,  is  the  allegory,  which  is  here  short  and  un- 
extended  ;  the  combination  of  both  in  the  words  the 
shi]?  ploughs  the  sea  is  the  figure.  The  allegory  is 
thus  the  basis  of  the  figure  ;  the  figure  is  the  full 
development  of  the  allegory.  The  allegory  is  the 
elemental  form.  It  is  as  much  the  basis  of  all  figu- 
rative language  as  the  syllogism  is  of  reasoning. 

This  is  the  real  distinction  which  exists  between 
those  ideograpliic  signs  which,  on  the  one  hand,  are 
called  allegories,  parables,  types,  and  symbols ;  and 
on  the  other,  figure,  metaphor,  and  trope.  The  grand 
distinction  between  the  two  classes  lies  in  this,  tliat 
the  first  express  a  first  representation,  containing 
within  it  a  second,  which  second  is  either  concealed 
or  siibordinate.  The  allegory^  distinctively,  expresses 
the  first  representation  in  the  form  of  feigned  objects^ 
connected  together  either  by  a  natural  relationship 
or  by  a  certain  plot  developed  which  binds  them 
together ;  the  parable  expresses  the  first  representa- 
tion in  the  form  of  a  feigned  narrative  ;  the  type  in 
the  form  of  a  real  historical  object  or  event.  The  sym- 
bol is  the  subordinate  part  of  the  sign  when  its  con- 
stitution is  complex.  Thus  in  the  allegory  of  Joseph's 
dream.  Gen.  xxxvii.  9,  the  sun,  moon,  and  eleven 
stars  are  symbols.  These  signs,  allegory,  parable, 
type,  and  symbol,  are  all  distinguished  by  the  com- 
mon  characteristic  of  developing  the  first  of  those 


ALLEGORY   AXD   FIGURE.  11 

two  ideas,  wliicli  compose  the  ideograpliic  sign, 
and  of  making  it,  if  not  the  exchisive,  at  least  the 
predominant  idea  developed,  while  they  withhold 
either  entirely  or  to  a  great  extent,  the  second  idea. 

The  figure  or  metajJiwr'  employs  Qi\hQY  feigned  or 
real  objects^  or  feigned  or  real  actions^  to  express  the 
Becond  idea,  which  second  is  fnlly  developed  and 
brought  out,  and  holds  the  prominent  i:)lace  in  the 
constitution  of  the  sign.  Of  necessity  the  figure  must 
be  short,  for  were  it  long  the  first  representation 
would  then  naturally  assume  the  predominance,  and 
the  sign  would  lose  the  character  of  a  figure  and 
merge  into  the  allegoric  form.  A  trope  is  a  figure 
which  has  passed  into  a  current  phrase. 

These  signs,  whether  allegoric  or  figurative,  are 
frequently  classed  under  the  general  designation  of 
figurative  language.  This  expression  is  not  correct. 
A  better  would  be  ideograpJdc  language,  which  ex- 
presses the  character  of  the  language  as  being  a  lan- 
guage of  ideas.  This  again,  as  w^e  see,  manifests  the 
grand  subdivision  into  allegoric  signs  on  the  one 
hand,  the  characteristic  of  w^hich  is  to  fully  develop 
the  first  idea,  and  figurative  on  the  other,  the  char- 
acteristic of  which  is  to  fully  develop  the  second. 
Other  distinctions  are  not  of  equal  importance  to  this. 
This  is  of  great  importance,  for  it  really  constitutes 
these  two  descriptions  of  signs  two  distinct  languages, 
inasmuch  as  the  signs  of  the  one  are  secret  and  of  the 
other  open.  The  term  ideographic,  as  we  see,  thor- 
oughly expresses  the  nature  of  this  language  thus 
subdivided.     It  is  a  language  of  ideas.     These  ideas 


12  ALLEGOEY   AND   FIGURE. 

are  indeed  expressed  in  words,  but  these  words  in 
all  cases  hold  a  second  idea  witliin  them,  distinct 
from  the  first,  which  they  convey  literally,  and  which 
second  idea  is  in  this  case  alone  the  organ  of  com- 
munication. The  literal  language  in  wljich  the  first 
representation  is  conveyed,  has  no  sense  apart  from 
the  second  representation,  which  it  w^as  intended  to 
suggest  and  develop.  This  is  then  a  language  in 
which  ideas  are  really  the  sig7is.  As  the  ideas  of  the 
human  mind  are  infinite,  so  are  the  signs.  Here, 
then,  is  a  language  in  which  the  mind  can  express 
itself  in  its  own  element,  and  wdiich  is  boundless  as 
itself — boundless  as  the  sea,  and  it  may  be  added, 
clear,  briglit,  and  sparkling  as  its  waters.  It  is  a 
language  which  may  be  wrought  by  the  aid  of  com- 
paratively few  arbitrary  signs.  It  is  the  language  of 
savage  nations,  for  the  reason  that  they  have  few  of 
these;  it  is  the  language  of  polished  nations,  because 
they  have  many  ideas.  In  the  figurative  form  it  is 
clear,  bright,  and  sparkling ;  in  the  allegoric,  it  is 
secret,  dark,  and  profound. 

From  the  distinction  wdiich  has  been  drawn  be- 
tween allegory  and  figure,  the  following  points  ot 
diflference  naturally  follow,  and  in  regard  to  the 
former,  we  observe — 

1^^.  That  allegories  contain  as  little  admixture  as 
possible  of  language  to  be  taken  literally.  There  is 
in  general  no  more  of  this,  than  so  much  as  is  requi- 
site to  connect  the  difiPerent  parts  of  the  allegory  to- 
gether. The  great  object  held  to  view  is  to  place  a 
representation  before  the  mind  which  may  be  contem- 


ALLEGORY   AND   FIGUEE.  13 

plated  singly  and  apart  from  all  other  ideas.  Hence 
the  admixture  of  foreign  elements  is  avoided  in  every 
well-constructed  allegory.  The  more  purely  allegori- 
cal the  language  is  the  better.  The  literal  language 
employed  in  it  is  commonly  separable  with  ease  and 
exactness.  It  generally  strikes  the  mind  with  obvi- 
ousness as  being  of  the  nature  of  machinery  for  con- 
necting the  allegory  or  ornament  for  adorning  it. 

2d.  That  it  is  the  tendency  of  an  allegory  to  be 
long.  In  every  allegory  the  mind  is  called  upon  to 
contemplate  a  single  representation  developing  one 
train  of  ideas.  The  mind  is  summoned  away  to  pur- 
sue one  line  of  thought.  It  naturally  appears  unlit- 
ting  to  exact  this  sacrifice  from  it  for  a  short  allegory. 
At  the  same  time,  both  in  the  construction  and  ap- 
prehension of  an  allegory,  the  mind  being  confined 
to  one  line  of  thought  and  being  in  itself  unresting, 
naturally  runs  on  spontaneously  in  the  extension  of 
the  allegory.  It  is  the  natural  tendency  of  an  alle- 
gory to  lengthen  itself. 

3cZ.  That  all  allegories  are  problems  to  be  solved 
by  the  understanding,  and  that  at  the  conclusion  of 
every  one  the  question  must  arise,  to  be  answer- 
ed, What  does  this  signify  ?  If  this  question  has  been 
answered,  that  is,  if  it  has  been  developed,  the  alle- 
gory is  no  longer  such,  strictly  so  called,  but  it  is  a 
figure.  It  is  such,  at  least,  so  far  as  the  development 
of  the  second  sense  is  concerned.  In  every  allegory 
the  mind  is  called  upon  to  look  at  a  single  pictorial 
representation,  and  to  contemplate  this  apart  from 
every  thing  else,  even  from  the  application  itself.     It 


14:  ALLEGORY    AND   FIGHKE. 

onglit  to  bo  so  delivered,  that  the  application  is  an 
act  of  the  mind,  second  and  distinct,  which  follows, 
and  is  not  contemporaneous  with  the  first  represen- 
tation. 

^tli.  Tliat  the  allegory,  from  the  circn*mstance  of 
its  withholding  the  second  representation,  is  free 
from  that  dbsioTtlity  of  statement  which  always  marks 
the  figure.  It  is  perfectly  rational  in  its  statement ; 
it  draws  a  first  representation,  and  permits  a  second 
to  be  developed  therefrom  and  its  sense  discovered. 
But  it  does  not  state  that  the  one  representation  is 
the  other,  which  is  an  absurdity,  and  which  the  figure 
does  ;  at  least  it  is  not  its  principle  to  do  this. 

oth.  That  allegories  are  not  addressed  in  the  first 
instance,  at  least,  to  the  feelings  ;  they  are  designed 
solely  to  exercise  and  inform  the  understanding. 
Whatever  is  intended  to  make  its  way  to  the  heart 
and  to  excite  the  emotions,  is  necessarily  conveyed 
and  applied  with  rapidity.  The  very  circumstance 
of  calling  a  halt  is  adverse  to  emotional  excitement. 
But  every  allegory  does  this ;  it  brings  the  mind  to  a 
stand-still  for  the  time  being,  and  summons  it  to 
pause,  to  look  at  and  contemplate  the  representation, 
and,  more  than  this,  to  contemplate  it  apart  from 
all  other  associations,  except  those  purely  intellectual 
ones  which  its  solution  demands.  It  calls  upon  the 
mind  to  divest  itself  of  its  feelings,  and  to  contem- 
plate the  one  representation  made,  that  it  may  under- 
stand it.  It  leads  the  mind  then,  for  the  time  being, 
into  the  region  of  pure  contemplation. 

For  the  reason  last  mentioned,  the  allegory  is  em- 


ALLEGOKY   AND   FIGURE.  16 

ployed  witli  great  effect  to  convey  trutlis  of  an  un- 
palatable nature  to  the  niincl  which  it  might  not  re- 
ceive except  in  this  form.     Salutary  medicine  may 
be  conveyed  into  the  system  under  its  wise  disguise. 
It  is  also  serviceable  for  conveying  truths  in  an  ele- 
mental form,  and  partially  to  the  mind  when  it  is  not 
capable  of  bearing  them  in  all  their  fulness.     With 
a  beneficent  regard  at  once  to  the  obstinacy  of  his 
enemies  and  the  spiritual  deficiencies  of  his  disciples, 
the  Saviour  of  the  world  frequently  had  recourse  to 
this  mode  of  instruction.     He  often  succeeded  by  an 
allegory  in   impressing   on  the  minds  of  the  "Jews 
truths  which,   except   under  this   form,  might  have 
aroused  their  worst  prejudices  and  passions.      Men 
will  listen  patiently  to  an  allegory  simply  for  the  rea- 
son that  they  do  not  understand  its  real  meaning. 
Tlie  truth  then  steals  in  unperceived  with  its  armor 
wrapped  under  the  mantle  of  the  allegory,  and  it  is 
in  the  heart  of  the  citadel  before  its  presence  is  de- 
tected, when  it  displays  itself  with  power  and  some- 
times in  an  appalling  manner.      Thus   David   was 
smote  with  a  full  apprehension  of  his  guilt  through 
the  allegory  delivered  to  him  by  the  prophet  l^athan. 
The  Hebrew  king  calmly  and  unconsciously  contem- 
plated his  iniquity  in  the  form  of  an  allegory,  and  it 
was  only  when  the  words  came  to  him,  as  they  did 
with  irresistible  power,  ''Thou  art  the  man,"  that  he 
perceived  that  he  had  passed  sentence  on  himself 
witli  the  cool  deliberation  and   integrity  of  an  un- 
biassed judge.      AVhen  the  Eoman  populace  were 
roused  to  fuiy  for  want  of  bread,  Shakespeare  reprc- 


16  ALLEGORY   AND   FIGITEE. 

sents  tlie  orator  setting  before  their  minds  tlie  folly 
of  their  measures,  and  conveying  to  them  instruc- 
tion on  a  profound  political  problem  under  the  form 
of  the  allegory  of  "  the  stomach  and  the  members  of 
the  body."  To  this  the  infuriated  multitude  listened 
patiently,  because  they  did  not  perceive  the  drift 
of  it. 

On  the  other  hand  it  is  to  be  noted : 

1st.  Tliat  in  the  expression  of  a  figure  there  is  as 
much  admixture  of  language  to  be  taken  literally  as 
is  compatible  witli  the  preservation  of  it.  The  rea- 
son of  this  is  obvious.  The  discovery  of  the  second 
representation — the  application  is  here  the  main  ob- 
ject, and  as  it  is  language  taken  literally  that  eftects 
this,  its  presence  is  necessary.  The  more  there  is  of 
language  to  be  taken  literally,  consistently  with  the 
preservation  of  the  figure,  the  more  developed  and 
the  more  perfect  the  figure  becomes. 

2d.  That  it  is  the  tendency  of  a  figure  to  be  short. 
In  the  figure  it  is  the  application  which  is  mainly 
sought  after.  But  every  extension  of  the  figurative 
language  has  a  certain  tendency  to  withdraw  the 
mind  from  the  apj^lication  ;  there  is  consequently  a 
natural  desire  to  shorten  it.  While  the  law  of  self- 
preservation  leads  an  allegory  to  be  long,  for  it  is  by 
its  extension  that  it  lives,  the  same  law  leads  a  figure 
to  be  short.  By  every  expansion  the  figure  incurs 
the  risk  of  ceasing  its  existence  as  a  figure  and  of  be- 
coming an  allegory.  By  the  extension,  the  mind  is 
withdrawn  from .  the  second  representation,  which  is 
the  stronghold  of  the  figure,  to  the  first  representa- 


ALLEGORY   AND   FIGURE.       '  17 

tioii,  wliicli  is  the  stronghold  of  the  allegory.  If  tlie 
extension  is  permitted  to  go  on  to  too  great  a  lengtli, 
tliere  is  danger  that  the  mind  may  become  entirely 
occupied  by  the  first  representation — to  ail  intents 
and  purposes,  therefore,  possessed  by  the  allegory  to 
the  exclusion  of  the  figure.  As  an  allegorj^  avoids 
shortness  as  a  cause  of  dissolution,  for  at  its  termina- 
tion the  application  comes  and  it  ceases,  a  figure  for 
the  same  reason  avoids  length.  By  over-shortness 
the  allegory  practically  becomes  a  figure,  and  by 
over-length  the  figure  practically  becomes  an  alle- 
gory. If  short,  the  mind  engages  itself  with  the 
double  representation  and  the  figure  lives.  If  long, 
the  mind  is  carried  away  with  the  first  representa- 
tion, and  the  allegory  lives.  The  excellence  of  an 
allegory  cceteris  paribus  lies  in  its  length ;  that 
of  a  figure  in  its  shortness.  The  former  is  all  the 
higher  if  it  fills  a  book  ;  the  latter  is  restricted  to  a 
condition  of  brevity,  and  may  be  expressed  in  a 
word. 

Zd.  That  figures  are  not  intended  to  undergo  any 
process  of  solution,  but  to  be  instinctively  and  instan- 
taneously apprehended.  There  is  no  second  repre- 
sentation to  be  divined.  In  every  figure  there  are 
two  pictures  placed  before  the  mind  at  once,  the 
second  of  which  thoroughly  explains  the  first. 

^tli.  That  it  is  an  invariable  mark  of  a  figure,  that 
it  makes  a  statement  of  an  absurdity  ;  it  asserts  that 
the  one  representation,  although  difi"erent,  is  the 
other.  Thus  it  asserts,  that  Christ  is  "  a  door,"  or  is 
"  a  vine,"  w^iich  is  absurd.     This  it  does  through  its 


18  AJLLEGORY   AND   FIGITRE. 

anxiety  to  develop  the  second  sense  as  concisely  as 
possible.  It  lias  been  above  mentioned,  that  the  two 
ideas  which  compose  an  ideographic  sign  are  related 
to  each  other,  not  on  the  ground  of  identity,  but  of 
analogy.  The  figure  states,  that  these  ideas  are  the 
same,  wlbich  is  always  absurd.  The  truth  lies  in  the 
resemblance  which  they  bear  to  each  other.  The 
mind  has  always  important  deductions  to  make  from 
the  statement  of  the  hgure.  It  has  a  process  of  com- 
parison to  perform,  separating  the  elements  of  agree- 
ment and  of  difference  which  obtain  between  the  two 
ideas  ;  it  tlien  founds  upon  tlie  real  analogy  which  it 
discovers.  The  more  cibsunl  the  statement  is,  the 
bolder  the  figure  is.  The  figure,  however,  owes  no 
small  amount  of  its  attractiveness  to  this  very  feature. 
The  mind  rejoices  to  find  in  the  seeming  absurdity 
projyriety  and  triitJi.  The  structure  of  the  allegory 
is,  in  this  respect,  more  scientific. 

6^/i.  That  figures  are  well  adapted  for  working  on 
the  feelings.  By  the  instantaneous  and  vivid  appli- 
cation of  the  subject  w^hich  they  make  to  the  mind, 
by  the  light  and  force  which  they  instantaneously  car- 
ry wdth  them,  they  are  powerful  instruments  in  the 
hands  of  all  those  Avho  would  stir  the  emotions. 
They  present  to  the  mind  the  whole  subject  to  be 
apprehended  with  fulness  and  vividness.  They  are 
serviceable  instruments  in  the  hands  of  orators  who 
would  rouse  the  feelings,  and  they  are  employed  for 
this  end  with  great  mastery  and  power  by  the  He- 
brew prophets. 

It  is  worthy  of  observation,  that  it  rarely  occurs 


ALLEGORY    AND   FIGUKE.  19 

that  an  allegory  is  to  be  found  in  the  perfectly  pure 
state  according  to  the  above  definition  ;  the  second, 
or  real  sense,  which  it  is  the  characteristic  of  the  alle- 
gory to  conceal,  is  generally  in  a  greater  or  less  de- 
gree developed.  We  should  do  wrong,  however,  to 
call  it,  on  this  account,  a  figure,  even  although  a  very 
considerable  development  of  the  second  sense  were 
made.  To  determine  in  a  given  case  what  is  alle- 
gory and  what  is  figure  it  is  necessary  to  determine 
whether  the  composition  has  more  of  the  quality  of 
tlie  one  or  of  the  other.  This  will  decide  the  ques- 
tion whether  it  is  to  be  ranked  as  allegory  or  as 
figure.  If  the  first  representation  is  predominant,  and 
the  second  sense,  though  partially  developed,  is  still 
really  subordinate,  the  composition  is  justly  to  be  re- 
garded as  an  allegory.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
second  sense  is  the  main  and  predominant  one,  it  is 
to  be  held  a  figure.  It  has  been  disputed  whether 
the  parable  of  the  vine,  John  xv.,  is  to  be  regard- 
ed as  an  allegory  or  a  figure.  The  first  represen- 
tation is  here,  however,  presented  to  the  mind  in 
a  much  stronger  degree  than  the  second,  which  is 
only  partially  developed.  It  is  accordingly  to  be 
properly  considered  as  an  allegory. 

It  seldom  occurs,  however,  that  these  two  kinds 
of  composition  approach  each  other  so  closely  as  to 
render  a  discrimination  between  them  a  matter  of 
any  difficulty  when  the  above  definition  is  held  in 
view.  The  predominance  of  the  first  or  of  the  second 
representation  is  a  sufficiently  significant  criterion. 

From  the   points  of  contrast  which   have   been 


20  ALLEGORY   AND   FIGTJKE. 

stated  above,  and  which  are  sufficiently  obvious,  it 
appears  tliat  there  is  a  very  considerable  difference 
between  an  allegory  and  a  figure.  Tlie  former  is  es- 
sentially a  secret,  and,  to  a  certain  extent,  crypto- 
grammic  art  of  communication,  partaking  of  the  na- 
ture of  the  hieroglyphic ;  while  this  element  of  se- 
crecy does  not  at  all  inhere  in  the  figure.  It  follows, 
as  a  consequence,  that  there  is  a  great  difference  be- 
tween allegoric  and  figurative  language,  or,  between 
that  wdiich  delivers  an  allegory  and  that  which  de- 
livers a  figure.  But  the  symbolic  language  of  the 
prophets  is  allegorical  as  the  interpretations  show. 
It  follows  that  there  is  a  great  difference  between 
symbolical  and  figurative  language. 

Unfortunately  for  a  legitimate  and  valid  interpre- 
tation of  the  Revelation  this  essential  difference  has 
been  overlooked  by  the  great  mass  of  commentators, 
if  not  all,  who  have  written  on  the  book.  They  have 
regarded  it  as  if  it  were  written  in  figurative  lan- 
guage, and  as  if  the  same  method  of  explication  were 
to  be  applied  to  it  as  to  the  writings  of  the  figurative 
prophets.  Probably  more  errors  of  interpretation 
have  flowed  from  this  source  than  from  any  other. 

A  recent  writer  makes  the  following  remarks  on 
this  subject,  which  has  not  yet  hitherto,  as  we  con- 
ceive, been  developed  with  the  requisite  clearness 
and  precision.  The  important  bearing  of  it,  how- 
ever, on  a  right  interpretation  of  prophetical  lan- 
guage, can  hardly  be  over-estimated  : 

•  "  Before  proceeding  to  the  interpretation  of  alle- 


ALLEGORY  AND   FIGURE.  21 

goiy,  it  will  be  expedient  to  inquire  into  tlie  nature 
of  the  figure  so  termed.  The  word  has  been  used  in 
various  senses,  and  with  great  vagueness.  Some- 
times it  is  said  to  denote  a  continued  metaphor. 
Thus  Cicero  says,  '  When  several  kindred  metaphors 
succeed  one  another,  they  alter  the  form  of  a  compo- 
sition ;  for  which  reason  a  succession  of  this  kind  is 
called  by  the  Greeks  an  allegory ;  and  properly,  in 
respect  to  the  etymology  of  the  word  ;  but  Aristotle, 
instead  of  considering  it  as  a  new  species  of  figure, 
has  more  judiciously  comprised  such  modes  of  expres- 
sion under  the  general  appellation  of  metaphors.'* 
In  like  manner  Dr.  Blair  writes,  '  An  allegory  may 
be  regarded  as  a  continued  metaphor.'  Those  who 
take  this  view  of  it,  find  it  difficult,  or  rather  impos- 
sible, to  define  where  the  one  terminates  and  the 
other  begins.  Some  confine  metaphor  to  a  word, 
and  refer  whatever  exceeds  this  to  the  head  of  alle- 
gory. This  makes  the  latter  include  one  or  more 
sentiments.  Sometimes  the  allegory  is  made  a  dis- 
tinct species,  having  within  itself  a  congruity  and 
completeness  unlike  a  number  of  tropes  put  together. 
Lowth  enumerates  three  forms  of  allegory,  f  but  their 
limits  are  not  well  marked.  It  appears  to  us,  that 
some  confusion  would  be  avoided  by  attaching  the 
same  meaning  to  the  term  allegory  wherever  it  oc- 
curs, and  thus  separating  it  more  exactly  from  other 
figures.     In  allegory,  as  in  metaphor,  two  things  are 

*  De  Oratore. 

t  Lecture  X.     On  the  Sacred  Poetry  of  the  HelreiDS, 


22  ALLEGORY   AND  FIGURE. 

presented  to  view ;  but  yet  there  is  considerable  dif- 
ference between  both  tropes.  'The  term  allegory, 
according  to  its  original  and  proper  meaning,  denotes 
a  representation  of  one  thing,  which  is  intended  to 
excite  the  representation  of  another  thing.  Every 
allegory,  therefore,  must  be  subjected  to  a  two-fold 
examination  :  we  must  first  examine  the  immediate 
representation,  and  then  consider  what  other  repre- 
sentation it  was  intended  to  excite.  Now,  in  most 
allegories,  the  immediate  representation  is  made  in 
the  form  of  a  narrative ;  and  since  it  is  the  object  of 
an  allegory  to  convey  a  moral,  not  an  historic  truth, 
the  narrative  itself  is  commonly  fictitious.  The  im- 
mediate representation  is  of  no  further  value,  tlian  as 
it  leads  to  the  ultimate  representation.  It  is  the  ap- 
plication, or  the  moral,  of  the  allegory  which  consti- 
tutes its  worth. 

" '  Since,  then,  an  allegory  comprehends  two.  dis- 
tinct representations,  the  interpretation  of  an  allegory 
must  comprehend  two  distinct  operations.  The  first 
of  them  relates  to  the  immediate  representation  ;  the 
second  to  the  ultimate  representation.'  * 

"  Tlie  metaphor  always  asserts  or  imagines  that 
one  object  is  another.  Thus  '  Judah  is  a  lion's  whelp,' 
(Gen.  xlix.  9  ;)  'I  am  the  true  vine,'  (John  xv.  1.) 
On  the  contrary,  allegory  never  aflirms  that  one  thing 
is  another,  which  is  in  truth   an   absurdity. "f — Sa- 

*  Marsli's  Lectures  on  the  Interpretations  of  tlie  Bihle.  pp. 
343,  344. 

t  See  A  Treatise  on  the  Figures  of  Speech.    By  Alexander 


ALLEGOKT   AND   FIGUKE.  23 

(yred  Ilermeneutlcs  DevelojKcl  and  Aj)plied,  i&e.  By 
Samuel  Davidson^  LL.D, 

Dr.  Blair  observes  :  "  The  only  material  difference 
between  metaphor  or  figure  and  allegory,  (besides  the 
one  being  short  and  the  other  long,)  is,  that  a  meta- 
phor always  explains  itself  by  the  words  that  are  con- 
nected with  it  in  their  proper  and  natural  meaning." 

Mr.  Webster,  in  liis  Dictionary,  gives  a  very  clear 
and  correct  definition  of  allegory,  thus  :  "  A  figura- 
tive sentence  or  discourse  in  which  the  principal  sub- 
ject is  described  by  another  resembling  it  in  its  prop- 
erties and  circumstances.  The  principal  subject  is 
thus  kept  out  of  view,  and  we  are  left  to  collect  the 
intentions  of  tlie  writer,  or  speaker,  by  the  resem- 
blance of  the  secondary  to  the  primary  subject.  Al- 
legory is  in  words  what  hieroglyphics  are  in  paint- 
ing."' 

Carson,  A.  K  Dublin,  1826.  12mo,  pp.  51,  52.  This  acute 
writer  has  expounded  the  nature  of  an  allegory  much  more  cor- 
rectly than  Lord  Kames,  Dr.  Blair,  or  Dr.  Campbell. 


CHAPTEE  ni. 

ALLEGORIC   OR   SYMBOLIC   LAITGUAGE   IS    ENIGMATICAL. 

It  has  been  -stated  above,  that  towards  the  com- 
prehension of  an  ideographic  sign  there  is  a  complex 
operation  of  the  mind  necessary.  Every  such  sign, 
be  it  allegory  or  figure,  has  for  its  basis  two  ideas  or 
tw^o  representations,  which  must  be  compared  to- 
gether ere  the  true  value  of  the  sign  be  ascertained. 
The  allegory,  it  has  been  shown,  concerns  itself  with 
the  first  of  these,  leaving  the  mind  to  make  out  for 
itself  the  second ;  the  figure  or  metaphor,  on  the 
other  hand,  combines  both  ideas,  ex]3resses  them 
both,  and  mingles  both  representations. 

It  is  at  this  point  that  symbolic  and  figurative 
language  diverge  from  each  other,  and  diverge  very 
w^idely.  Figurative  language  makes  a  hasty  incur- 
sion on  the  ideographic  ground,  and  having  plucked 
a  flower  there,  it  speedily  returns  to  the  beaten  track 
of  literal  language,  from  wdience  to  make  another  in- 
cursion at  a  subsequent  time,  and  at  a  different  point. 
Allegorical  or  symbolic  language,  having  once  left 
the  literal  track,  pursues  its  independent  path  on  the 
ideographic  domain,  settles  upon  it,  turns  agricul- 
turist, takes  in  fields,  cultivates  them  and  sows  seedj 


SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE   ENIGMATICAL.  25 

which  after  many  days  ripens  and  yields  a  harvest, 
which  the  understanding  must  reap  with  its  sharp 
sickle.  In  a  word,  it  abides  on  the  ideographic 
ground  and  never  leaves  it.  It  results  from  this  dif- 
ference, that  all  allegorical  and  symbolic  writing  re- 
quires interpretation  ;  it  must  be  translated  from  its 
ideographic  into  literal  language  ;  the  something  else 
which  its  pictorial  representation  adumbrates  must 
be  discovered — in  a  word,  the  second  picture  must  be 
painted  by  the  mind  itself,  for  it  is  not  painted  in  the 
allegor} .  With  figurative  or  metaphoric  language 
this  is  not  necessary,  it  being  the  distinctive  charac- 
teristic of  this  species  of  composition  that  it  explains 
itself ;  if  an}^  portion  of  enigma  adheres  to  it,  it  is  to 
this  extent  faulty  ;  it  professes  to  deliver  to  the  mind 
the  second  or  explanatory  representation ;  if  it  fails 
to  do  this,  it  is  to  that  extent  defective.  It  is  the  ex- 
cellence of  a  figure  to  be  clear. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  may  be  said  that  it  is  the 
beauty  of  an  allegory  to  be  dark.  It  may  justly  take 
to  itself  the  words  of  Solomon's  bride,  and  say,  "I 
am  hlack  hut  comely!''^  It  is  essentially  a  cry]3to- 
grammic  writing.  It  presents  to  the  mind  only  the 
first  representation.  Of  necessity,  it  contains  an 
enigma  ;  the  question  must  arise.  What  does  this  sig- 
nify ?  what  is  the  second  and  ultimate  representation 
in  wliich  the  real  sense  lies?  When  Christ  said, 
*'  He  that  entereth  not  by  the  door  into  the  sheepfold, 
but  climbeth  up  some  other  way,  the  same  is  a  thief 
and  a  robber,"  John  x.  1,  he  spoke  allegorically  and 
also  enigmatically.  He  presented  to  the  mind  a  pic- 
2 


26  SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE  -ENIGMATICAL. 

ture  of  a  slieepfold  witli  a  door  to  it,  and  thieves  and 
robbers  climbing  up  some  other  way.  By  this  alle- 
gorical representation  he  designed  to  convey  a  second 
representation.  What  was  it  ?  The  Pharisees  were 
unable  to  discover  it,  and  Christ  laid  it  bare  before 
their  minds,  showing  them  that  the  sheepfold  repre- 
sents the  kingdom  of  God,  that  he  is  the  only  way 
of  entrance  into  it,  and  that  all  that  attempt  to  pass 
into  it,  except  through  him,  are  thieves  and  robbers. 
He  thus  delivered  an  allegory  and  an  enigma,  for  the 
solution  of  which  they  were  incompetent,  and  which 
he  solved  for  them. 

It  is  the  discovery  of  the  second  representation, 
which  contains  the  real  meaning,  that  invests  an 
allegory  with  all  its  value.  We  have  been  hitherto 
pressing  the  importance  of  the  first  picture.  We 
have  done  this  for  the  reason,  that  the  allegory  con- 
sists in  the  presentation  of  it,  and  that  in  this  restric- 
tion to  the  first  picture  lies  the  difference  between 
allegory  and  figure.  The  allegory  is,  however,  value- 
less without  the  second  representation  also.  This 
contains  the  idea  or  ideas  to  be  communicated.  The 
first  is  the  mere  vehicle,  which,  till  the  living  agent 
of  the  second  sense  is  yoked  to  it,  is  motionless  and 
useless.  It  is,  to  use  another  image,  the  external 
casket  which  must  be  broken  or  penetrated  to  obtain 
the  jewel  of  the  second  sense  within. 

Now  the  first  picture  may  be  a  mere  creature  of 
the  imagination,  or  it  may  be  a  copy  of  historical 
facts.  It  is  of  no  essential  moment  which  of  these  it 
is ;  as  used  by  the  allegory,  it  is  not  designed  to  ex- 


SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE  ENIGMATICAL.  27 

press  any  reality.  It  is  a  mere  phantasm  ;  it  is  a 
picture  painted  only  to  develop  a  second  in  wliicli 
the  real  sense  lies.  The  discovery  and  development 
of  this  second  picture  is  always  more  or  less  a  diffi- 
culty and  enigma.  It  is,  however,  a  necessity.  The 
allegory  is  without  value  until  it  is  discovered  and 
fully  developed. 

An  allegory  may  be  regarded  as  more  or  less 
enigmatical,  according  to  the  proportions  in  which 
the  three  following  elements  prevail  in  it : 

1^^.  The  inaptitude  of  the  first  to  suggest  the 
second  representation. 

2<:?.  The  complexity  of  the  allegory  if  its  plan  be 
unknown. 

dd.  The  allegoric  element  being  in  excess. 

It  is  in  the  Jirst  of  these  elements  that  the  strength 
of  the  enigma  lies.  If  there  be  nothing  at  all  in  the 
first  representation  to  suggest  the  second,  the  allegory 
may  remain  forever  an  unsolved  enigma,  the  second 
sense  of  which  is  known  alone  to  its  constructor. 
Until  the  second  picture  arises  to  view,  it  is  plainly 
impossible  to  institute  that  comparison  between  it 
and  the  first,  by  which  alone  the  one  is  known  to  be 
a  representation  of  the  other,  and  in  virtue  of  the  cor- 
respondence between  which  we  discover  the  truth 
and  meaning  of  the  allegory.  When  Christ  said  to 
the  Jews,  "  destroy  this  temple,  and  in  three  days  I 
will  raise  it  up  again,"  there  was  nothing  in  these 
words  to  suggest  to  their  minds  the  second  picture, 
his  crucifixion,  his  remaining  in  the  state  of  the  dead 
for  three  days  and  his  resurrection  thereafter.     The 


28  SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE   ENIGMATICAL. 

allegory  is  here  extremely  simple.  Had  there  existed 
in  it  the  slightest  key  by  which  the  second  picture 
might  have  been  unlocked  and  exhibited  to  their 
minds,  the  Jews  could  not  have  failed  in  realizing  the 
meaning  of  the  allegory.  This  key,  however,  was 
w\anting ;  they  saw  no  trace  whatever  of  the  second 
picture,  and  the  w^ords  of  the  Redeemer  were  to  them 
without  sense. 

The  inaptitude  of  the  first  representation  to  con- 
tribute the  second,  may  arise  from  two  causes : 

1st  From  the  want  of  any  clue  conducting  from 
the  first  to  the  second. 

2d.  From  the  fact  that  the  second  picture  contains 
an  unknown  reality  /  a  reality  the  existence  of  which 
was  previously  unknown  to  the  mind. 

In  reference  to  the  first  of  these  causes  which 
hinder  the  first  representation  from  suggesting  the 
second,  it  is  to  be  observed  that  it  is  seldom  prevalent 
to  the  full  extent.  Most  allegories  do  afford  intima- 
tion of  some  kind  or  another  of  such  a  nature  as  to 
lead  the  mind  to  the  second  representation.  Some 
spring  is  almost  always  touched,  calculated  to  awaken 
that  train  of  associations  which  when  pursued  con- 
ducts to  it.  Thus  in  the  short  allegory  already  refer- 
red to,  "  He  that  entereth  not  by  the  door  into  the 
sheepfold,  but  climbeth  up  some  other  way,  the  same 
is  a  thief  and  a  robber;"  the  w^ord  "sheepfold"  in 
the  connection  in  which  it  stands  may  be  regarded  as 
affording  such  a  clue.  It  is  an  efficient  key  to  all  who 
are  aware  that  Christ  applies  the  image  of  sheep  to 
his  people.    His  people  being  his  sheep,  it  is  only  the 


SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE  ENIGMATICAL.  29 

perception  of  a  natural  relationship  to  see  in  the 
sheepfold  his  church  or  kingdom.  This  being  known, 
the  rest  of  the  allegory  is  with  ease  applied.  The 
Pharisees  whom  he  addressed  were  nnable  to  employ 
this  key,  and  they  w^ere  unable  to  apprehend  his 
meaning.  All  such  intimations  may  be  regarded  in 
the  light  of  germinal  developments  of  the  second 
picture.  The  clue  being  given  it  simply  requires 
mental  activity  in  the  detection  of  analogies,  to  bring 
the  second  representation  out  into  view.  The  sym- 
bolic j)rophecies  contain  many  such  keys  which  are 
in  the  highest  degree  important  towards  the  elimina- 
tion of  the  meaning. 

The  second  cause  which  prevents  the  second  and 
concealed  picture  from  emerging,  lies  in  the  fact  that 
it  contains  an  unknown  reality.  The  j)resence  of  this 
cause  offers  a  great  obstacle  to  the  interpretation. 
The  greater  number  of  the  allegories  delivered  by  the 
Saviour  developed  unknown  spiritual  realities,  and 
hence  the  inability  of  his  hearers  to  understand  them. 
All  prophetical  allegories  of  unfulfilled  events  are 
subjected  to  this  obscuring  cause.  They  contain  the 
rex^resentation  of  realities  that  are  unknown,  for  the 
events  which  they  foreshadow  are  future,  and  there- 
fore unknown.  When  Christ  said  to  the  Jews,  "  de- 
stroy this  temple,  and  in  three  days  I  will  raise  it  up 
again,"  they  would  have  had  little  difficulty  in  com- 
prehending the  allegory,  had  they  known  the  future 
facts  of  his  crucifixion  and  rising  from  the  dead  after 
three  days.  Hence  the  difficulty  of  interpreting  all 
symbolic  prophecies  before  their  fulfilment.     This 


30  SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE   ENIGMATICAL. 

cause  of  difficulty  naturally  ceases  when  tlie  events 
have  transpired. 

The  second  element  which  increases  the  enigmatical 
character  of  an  allegory,  is  its  complexity  and  length, 
provided  the  plan  which  holds  its  parts  in  relation- 
ship together  be  undiscovered.  A  short  and  simple 
allegory  may  be  easily  interpreted,  if  the  slightest 
clue  be  had  to  its  meaning.  It  is  not  so  with  one 
that  is  long  and  complex.  Here  part  of  the  meaning 
may  be  well  known,  and  that  of  the  remainder  may 
be  shrouded  in  profound  darkness.  This  will  be  the 
case  if  the  continuity  of  arrangement  which  leads 
from  the  known  to  the  unknown  be  undiscovered.  If 
this  be  known  the  complexity  and  length  of  the  alle- 
gory will  have  the  opposite  eff'ect ;  they  will  conduce 
to  the  discovery  and  especially  to  the  establishment  of 
the  meaning,  for  the  continuity  will  be  a  chain  with 
a  greater  number  of  links.  It  seems  unnecessary  to 
prove  that  a  long  and  complex  allegory  must  have  a 
definite  plan.  To  suppose  it  without  this  is  as  great 
an  absurdity  as  to  suppose  an  architectural  building 
without  any  arrangement  of  the  stones  which  com- 
pose it.  It  would  be  about  as  idle  to  prove  that  it 
must  possess  it  as  to  show  that  a  sentence  must  have 
construction.  The  sense  of  words  can  only  be  known 
by  their  relations  to  each  other;  the  sense  of  an 
allegory  can  only  be  known  by  the  relationship  of  its 
parts  to  one  another.  A  few  words  may  be  intel- 
ligible without  arrangement.  It  is  impossible  that  a 
great  number  of  them  can.  A  short  allegory  requires 
no  plan  ;  a  long  one  demands  it,  for  without  it  it  can 


SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE   ENIGMATICAL.  31 

neither  cohere  nor  exist  at  all  as  an  intelligible  com- 
j)osition. 

It  is  indubitable  that  a  main  caus6  which  has 
hitherto  prevented  the  true  and  satisfactory  interj^re- 
tation  of  the  Revelation  (and  the  true  interpretation 
will  always  be  satisfactory  to  the  mind)  lies  in  the 
length  and  complexity  of  the  prophecy,  and  the  ig- 
norance which  has  prevailed  on  the  part  of  inter- 
preters of  its  plan,  and  consequently  of  the  due 
arrangement  of  its  parts,  and  their  relationships  to 
each  other.  These  are  matters  absolutely  indispen- 
sable to  the  comprehension  of  any  long  and  complex 
allegory.  That  the  Revelation  is  an  allegory  is  cer- 
tain ;  that  it  is,  comparatively  speaking,  long  and 
complex,  is  also  certain ;  that  its  plan  has  hitherto 
been  unknown,  is  equally  certain.  Accordingly  one 
principal  barrier  to  its  interpretation  has  hitherto 
been  in  existence.  Until  this  be  removed,  its  inter- 
pretation cannot  be  accomplished.  Many  parts  of 
the  book  may  be,  and  doubtless  have  been,  truly 
interpreted.  But  these  interpretations  are  compara- 
tively valueless,  so  far  as  conviction  is  concerned. 
Without  the  plan  of  the  allegory  they  can  never  have 
the  seal  of  certainty  attached  to  them.  That  demon- 
strative evidence  is  wanting  which  the  knowledge  of 
the  plan  can  alone  yield. 

Dr.  Adam  Clarke,  in  the  Preface  to  his  Com- 
mentary  on  the  Revelation^  after  specifying  the  various 
systems  of  interpretations  which  have  been  maintain- 
ed,  makes  the  following  remarks : — "  My  readers 


32  SYMBOLIC  LANGUAGE  ENIGMATICAL. 

may  naturally  expect  that  I  sliould  either  give  a 
decided  preference  to  some  one  of  the  opinions  stated 
above,  or  produce  one  of  my  own :  I  can  do  neither ; 
nor  can  I  pretend  to  explain  the  book ;  I  do  not  un- 
derstand it ;  and  in  the  things  which  concern  so  sub- 
lime and  awful  a  subject,  I  dare  not,  as  my  predeces- 
sors, indulge  in  conjectures.  I  have  read  elaborate 
works  on  the  subject,  and  each  seemed  right  till 
another  was  examined  :  I  am  satisfied  that  no  certain 
inode  of  interpreting  the  prophecies  of  this  book  has 
yet  been  found  out;  and  I  will  not  add  another 
monument  to  the  littleness  or  folly  of  the  human 
mind  by  endeavoring  to  strike  out  a  new  course.  I 
repeat  it,  I  do  not  understand  the  book  ;  and  I  am 
satisfied  that  not  one  who  has  written  on  the  subject, 
knows  any  thing  more  of  it  than  myself:  I  should, 
perhaps,  except  J.  E.  Clarke,  who  has  written  on  the 
number  of  the  beast.  His  interpretation  amounts 
nearly  to  demonstration  ;  but  that  is  but  a  small  part 
of  the  difficulties  of  the  Apocalypse.  A  conjecture 
concerning  the  design  of  the  book  may  be  safely  in- 
dulged ;  thus,  then,  it  has  struck  me  that  the  book  of 
the  Apocalypse  may  be  considered  as  a  Pkophet  con- 
tinued in  the  church  of  God,  uttering  predictions 
relative  to  all  times,  which  have  their  successive  ful- 
filment as  ages  roll  on  ;  and  thus  it  stands  in  the 
Christian  church  in  the  place  of  the  succession  of 
PEOPHETS  in  the  JcAvish  church  ;  and  by  this  especial 
economy  prophecy  is  still  continued,  is  always  speak- 
ing ;  and  yet  a  succession  of  prophets  is  rendered  un- 
necessary,"    The  Pr.   accordingly   fully   recognized 


SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE  ENIGMATICAL.  33 

the  perfect  intelligibility  of  the  prophecy,  although, 
as  he  thinks,  the  certain  mode^  or,  as  he  expresses 
himself  in  another  place,  the  key  to  the  interpreta- 
tion has  not  been  discovered,  even  so  late  as  his  time, 
1830.  The  plan  of  the  allegory  is  the  key  to  the 
prophecy. 

But  thirdly^  that  which  in  a  very  great  degree 
tends  to  enhance  the  enigmatical  quality  of  an  alle- 
gory, is  the  circumstance  of  its  being  in  excess.  If 
almost  every  part  of  the  representation  is  impreg- 
nated with  a  second  sense,  the  interpretation  is  ren- 
dered more  difficult,  not  in  the  same  but  in  an  in- 
creased ratio,  because  the  allegory  is  rendered  pro- 
portionably  perplexed.  In  this  respect  the  allegories 
of  Scripture  present  a  great  diversity.  In  all  a  con- 
siderable portion  of  the  language  is  of  the  nature  of 
machinery  for  setting  forth  and  connecting  the  differ- 
ent parts  of  the  imagery.  In  most  of  the  parables  the 
greater  part  of  the  narration  has  no  second  sense  at 
all.  Many  things  are  introduced  by  way  of  ornament 
and  to  render  the  narration  more  pleasing,  which  are 
devoid  of  a  second  sense.  The  parable  above  quoted 
displays  the  allegoric  element  in  a  stronger  degree 
than  is  usual.  "He  that  entereth  not  by  the  door 
into  the  sheepfold,  but  climbeth  up  some  other  way, 
the  same  is  a  thief  and  a  robber."  Here  there  are 
few  words  that  do  not  contain  a  second  sense.  The 
allegory  may  be  regarded  then  as  here  in  excess. 
The  parable  of  the  vine  shows  likewise  the  alle- 
goric element  strongly  developed.  In  the  parable 
2* 


34:  SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE  ENIGMATICAL. 

of  the  prodigal  son,  and  many  others,  it  is  the  sa- 
lient points  alone  of  the  narration  which  bear  a  sec- 
ond sense. 

But  it  is  in  tlie  symbolic  prophecies  that  we  see 
the  allegoric  element  prevailing  in  its  full  intensity 
and  power.  In  these  the  allegory  is  in  great  excess. 
In  some  almost  ev^ery  word  has  a  double  sense.  Here 
we  see  the  natural  relations  of  objects  to  one  another, 
which  otherwise  are  for  the  most  part  observed,  sa- 
crificed to  develop  the  hidden  meaning.  In  these 
prophecies,  indeed,  the  allegorical  element  assumes  a 
totally  new  form,  and  coins  for  itself  a  language 
which  is  peculiar  to  itself.  This  language  is  at  once 
the  fruit  of  the  allegory's  being  in  excess,  and  at  the 
same  time  the  remedy  to  the  difficulty  occasioned 
thereby.  So  thoroughly  allegoric  is  the  prophecy,  that 
it  speaks  an  allegoric  language.  The*  words  in  which 
the  predictions  are  couched  bear  the  sense  that  is  cur- 
rent in  the  hieroglyphic  language  native  to  the  sym- 
bolic prophets.  The  difficulty  of  interpretation  which 
arises  from  the  allegory's  being  in  excess  then,  is 
probably  more  than  counterbalanced  by  the  presence 
of  this  language.  The  parable  is  to  be  interpreted 
solely  by  the  allegory  which  it  develops ;  the  sym- 
bolic prophecy  is  to  be  interpreted  by  the  allegory 
and  by  the  hieroglyphic  language.  This  language 
has  definite  significations  fixed  by  interpretations  ren- 
dered in  Scripture.  The  symbolic  prophecy  then 
stands  on  a  vantage  ground.  The  allegory,  it  is  true, 
is  excessive,  but  the  prophecy  is  furnished  with  a 
language  which,  if  it  does  not  altogether  disclose,  at 


SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE  ENIGMATICAL.  35 

least  confirms  and  ratifies  the  second  sense.  It  will 
be  necessary  to  treat  separately  of  the  relations  of 
this  special  language  to  the  prophetic  allegory,  as  its 
bearing  on  the  sense  of  the  prophecy  is  in  the  highest 
degree  important. 

JSTow  the  Revelation  develops  in  a  strong  degree 
three  of  the  above-mentioned  features  of  enigma: 

1^;^.  It  contains  the  allegory  in  excess. 

2r7.  It  is  distinguished  by  length  and  complexity. 

Sd.  It  has  contained  unknown  realities. 

The  key  to  the  solution  of  the  first  of  these  feat- 
ures, is  the  knowdedge  of  the  hieroglyphic  language. 
This  principle  of  solution  is  in  our  hands,  for  the  in- 
terpretations rendered  in  Scripture,  leave  no  doubt 
in  regard  to  the  signification  of  the  terms  employed  in 
it.  E'evertheless,  these  significations  have  a  certain 
latitude  and  generalness  in  them  which  it  requires 
the  kno^wledge  of  the  allegory  and  its  plan  to  reduce 
to  precision. 

The  key  to  the  solution  of  the  second  element  of 
enigma  will  lie  in  the  discovery  of  the  ^:>^<:m  of  the 
prophecy  which  resolves  its  comj)lexity  into  sim- 
plicity. This  has  hitherto  been  an  insuj^erable  bar- 
rier to  the  comprehension,  but  more  especially  to  the 
demonstration  of  the  sense  of  the  Revelation.  It  is 
no  small  part  of  the  aim  at  least  of  the  present  work 
to  develop  the  real  plan  of  the  prophecy. 

The  solution  of  the  third  enigmatical  feature  lies  in 
the  fact,  that  almost  all  the  predictions  of  the  book, 
as  is  generally  admitted,  have  been  fulfilled.  They 
have  thus  passed  from  the  state  of  imhiown  to  that 


36  SYMBOLIC  LANGUAaE   ENIGMATICAL. 

of  Icnown  realities,  and  hence  tins  cause  of  obscurity 
has  nearly  ceased. 

It  is  the  second  of  these  features  which  alone  pre- 
sents to  the  interpreter  any  real  difficulty.  The  plan 
is  the  desideratum  still  wanting  to  fix  the  true  bear- 
ings of  the  prophecy,  and  to  invest  its  hieroglyphic 
language  with  that  precision  which  it  is  calculated  to 
yield,  and  the  whole  prophecy  with  that  demonstra- 
tive evidence  which  it  is  designed  to  carry  with  it. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

UXITT   OF   IDEA   A   FUNDAMENTAL    PEINCIPLE   OF   THE 
ALLEGORY. 

But  ill  tlie  midst  of  the  darkness  of  enigma  "  light 
ariseth."  The  allegory  contains  within  itself  a  globe 
of  luminous  power,  which  requires  only  to  be  kindled 
to  display,  if  not  all  the  detail^  of  the  embossment  on 
this  opaque  sign,  at  least  the  general  design  of  it. 
This  illuminative  power  which  the  allegory  contains 
within  itself,  and  which  is  its  true  lamp,  is  unity  of 
idea.  This  being  apprehended  the  sense  of  the  alle- 
gory is  known. 

This  principle  is  inherent  in  every  ideographic 
sign,  whether  it  be  called  by  the  name  of  allegory  or 
parable,  type  or  symbol,  figure  or  metaphor.  Each 
of  these  is  one  sign :  one  sign  of  an  idea ;  there  hence 
belongs  to  each  a  unity  of  idea.  They  each  may  in- 
deed be  the  sign  of  many  ideas,  thoughts,  or  concep- 
tions, but  these  must  be  associated  and  combined 
together,  so  as  to  constitute  unity  in  the  group,  inas- 
much as  they  are  represented  by  but  one  sign.  Hence 
allegories  are  pervaded,  however  long  they  may  be, 
by  unity  of  idea. 

All  writers  on  rhetoric  from  Aristotle  downwards, 


38  UNITY   OF  THE   ALLEGORY. 

blame  the  admixture  of  two  ideas  in  the  same  figure. 
Quinctilian  says,  "We  must  be  particularly  careful 
to  end  with  the  same  kind  of  metaphor  with  which 
we  hav^e  begun.  Some,  when  they  begin  the  figure 
with  a  tempest,  conclude  with  a  conflagration,  which 
forms  a  shameful  inconsistency." 

Unity  of  conception,  however,  which  is  an  indis- 
pensable element  in  every  w^ell-constructed  figure,  is 
essential  to  the  existence  of  an  allegory.  It  is  the 
breath  of  its  vitality,  without  which  it  cannot  live. 
Without  it  the  figure  may  exist  in  a  perfectly  healthy, 
although  in  a  deformed  state.  Two  ideas  that  are 
different  may  cohere  in  a  figure  without  destroying 
its  sense,  although  thej  mar  its  beauty.  The  confu- 
sion which  naturally  arises  from  this  source,  is  in  tlie 
figure  corrected  by  the  explanation  in  literal  lan- 
guage, always  appended  to  it.  Thus  when  Shake- 
speare speaks  of  taking  ai^nis  against  a  sea  of  troubles, 
his  meaning  is  perfectly  well  understood  from  the 
literal  context.  But  were  an  allegory  constructed 
with  two  leading  ideas  in  it,  so  diverse  as  these  repre- 
sent,  it  would  be  an  incomprehensible  chaos.  The 
mere  imagery,  indeed,  might  be  expanded  into  an 
allegory,  but  upon  one  condition  alone,  that  it  is  bound 
together  by  unity  of  idea  in  the  subject.  Without  this 
binding  principle  it  would  inevitably  fall  to  pieces. 

The  allegories  of  Scripture  all  manifest  this  feature 
of  unity  of  idea.  The  ideas  developed  in  them  are 
all  connected  together  by  a  chain  of  association,  the 
links  of  which  are  perfect  and  unbroken.  Unity  of 
conception  is  the  centi*al  principle  which  presides  over 


UNITY    OF   THE   ALLEGOKY.  39 

the  group  of  ideas,  however  numerous  they  may  be. 
Thus  how  perfect  is  the  unity  which  prevails  iu  that 
beautiful  allegory  in  Ps.  Ixxx.  8 — 16 : 

"Thou  hast  brought  a  vine  out  of  Egypt:  thou 
hast  cast  out  tlie  heathen  and  planted  it.  Thou  pre- 
paredst  room  before  it,  and  didst  cause  it  to  take  deep 
root,  and  it  filled  the  land.  The  hills  were  covered 
with  the  shadow  of  it,  and  the  boughs  thereof  were 
like  the  goodly  cedars.  She  sent  out  her  bouglis  unto 
the  sea,  and  her  branches  unto  the  river.  Wh}^  hast 
thou  then  broken  down  her  hedges,  so  that  all  they 
which  pass  by  the  way  do  pluck  her?  The  boar  out 
of  the  wood  doth  waste  it,  and  the  wild  beast  of  the 
field  doth  devour  it.  Eetufn,  we  beseech  thee,  O 
God  of  hosts  :  look  down  from  heaven,  and  behold, 
and  visit  this  vine ;  and  the  vineyard  which  thy  right 
hand  hath  planted,  and  the  branch  that  thou  madest 
strong  for  thyself.  It  is  burnt  with  fire,  it  is  cut 
down  ;  they  perish  at  the  rebuke  of  thy  countenance." 

And  of  that  in  John  xv.  1 — 6  : 

"  I  am  the  true  vine,  and  my  Father  is  the  hus- 
bandman. Every  branch  in  me  that  beareth  not 
fruit,  he  taketh  away :  and  every  branch  that  beareth 
fruit,  he  purgeth  it,  that  it  may  bring  forth  more 
fruit.  Now  ye  are  clean  through  the  word  which  I 
have  spoken  unto  you.  Abide  in  me,  and  I  in  you. 
As  the  branch  cannot  bear  fruit  of  itself,  except  it 
abide  in  the  vine :  no  more  can  ye,  except  ye  abide 
in  me.  I  am  the  vine :  ye  are  the  branches :  He 
that  abideth  in  me,  and  I  in  him,  the  same  bringeth 
forth  much  fruit :  for  without  me  ye  can  do  nothing. 


4:0  UNITY   OF  THE   ALLEGORY. 

If  a  man  abide  not  in  me,  he  is  cast  forth  as  a  branch, 
and  is  withered;  and  men  gather  them,  and  cast  them 
into  the  fire,  and  they  are  burned." 

All  the  parables  delivered  by  the  Saviour  exem- 
plify the  principle. 

In  the  symbolic  prophecies  it  is  equally  visible. 
It  is  apparent  whether  we  take  the  short  allegories 
of  Joseph's  and  Pharaoh's  dreams,  (Gen.  xxxvii.  and 
xli.,)  or  the  more  extended  allegories  of  Daniel's 
prophecies  of  the  Image  and  the  Four  Beasts,  ch.  ii.  and 
vii.  In  these  prophecies  its  exhibition  is  made  in  a 
more  formaL manner  than  in  the  parables,  as  will  be 
apparent  on  a  comparison  between  the  two.  Unity  of 
idea  is  here  developed  in  the  form  of  the  composition 
as  well  as  in  the  subject  of  it.  The  two  following 
prophecies,  besides  displaying  unity  of  idea  in  the 
form  and  subject,  make  a  special  development  of 
the  principle  itself.  Thus  the  two  predictions  in 
Dan.  vii.,  and  in  Zech.  vi.,  w^iich  are  certainly  to 
be  held  the  very  highest  specimens  of  the  symbolic 
art  in  the  Old  Testament,  if  we  except  Dan.  ii.,  and 
which  may  therefore  be  appealed  to  with  the  great- 
est security,  consecrate  and  embalm  the  principle 
itself,  not  alone  by  putting  it  in  practice,  but  by  em- 
bodying it  in  a  special  representation.  They  repre- 
sent the  origination  of  the  subject  in  one  source. 
Nothing  could  more  strongly  evidence  unity  of  con- 
ception than  this.  The  subject  is  represented  to  have 
one  origin.  It  is  of  necessity  one.  It  has  the  unity 
of  the  plant  or  the  tree  which  springs  from  a  common 
root. 


XJOTTT   OF   THE   ALLEGORY.  4:1 

The  Revelation  displays  the  principle  in  an  emi- 
nent degree,  although  its  existence  has  been  sadly 
overlooked  by  the  greater  number  of  commentators 
upon  it.  The  most  learned  among  these  have  not 
scrupled  to  violate  all  regard  to  the  principle  by  rep- 
resenting it  as  delivered  in  two  books,  "  the  seven- 
sealed  "  and  '^  the  little  book."  It  is  all  delivered  in 
one  seven-sealed  book,  a  feature  in  the  re2:)resentation 
which  stamps  it  with  unity.  The  origination  of  the 
subject  is  made  from  a  common  source  by  the  inter- 
vention of  the  four  living  creatures — a  representation 
which  again  impresses  it  with  unity  ;  unity  of  con- 
ception characterizes  its  structure  and  its  plan.  I^o 
composition  can  manifest  unity  of  plan  and  of  plot 
more  thoroughly  than  it  does,  as  will  be  seen  upon 
examination.  The  burden  displays  unity.  It  is  the 
triumph  of  the  kingdom  of  God  over  the  last  of  the 
world-dominions,  the  Roman.  This  is  the  one  glo- 
rious theme  which  sounds  through  all  the  chords  of 
the  majestic  prophetic  lyre. 

It  is  evident  that  the  discovery  of  this  unity  is  a 
main  key  to  the  sense  of  the  allegory,  whatever  it  be. 
It  is  the  sole  key  by  which  we  can  decipher  the  par- 
ables. All  the  subordinate  signs  are  here  determin- 
able by  a  reference  to  that  unity  of  idea  which  sus- 
tains the  composition,  and  which  is  to  it  what  the 
backbone  is  to  the  animal.  It  is  certainly  the  most 
important  key  to  the  interpretation  of  a  symbolic 
prophecy  which  has  essentially  the  same  nature  as  the 
parable,  and  which  displays  unity  of  idea  in  matter 
and  form.     Here,  as  well  as  in  the  parable,  unity  of 


42    •  tnsriTY  of  the  allegoet. 

idea  determines  tlie  application  of  the  principal  as 
well  as  tlie  subordinate  symbols.  Let  us  try  the  effect 
of  this  key  of  explanation  on  any  of  these  prophecies 
—it  will  be  found  a  most  efficient  one.  Let  the  two 
allegories  in  Joseph's  dreams  be  taken  as  examples. 
The  one  idea  of  JosepNs  exaltation  will  determine 
the  senses  of  all  the  symbols,  sun,  moon,  stars,  and 
sheaves  of  corn,  with  sufficient  exactness.  Take  the 
allegory  which'  Joseph  interpreted  to  the  imprisoned 
butler  : 

"  And  the  chief  butler  told  his  dream  to  Joseph, 
and  said  to  him,  Li  my  dream,  behold,  a  vine  was 
before  me :  And  in  the  vine  were  three  branches : 
and  it  was  as  though  it  budded,  and  her  blossoms 
shot  forth;  and  the  clusters  thereof  brought  ripe 
grapes  :  and  Pharaoh's  cup  was  in  my  hand  :  and  I 
took  the  grapes,  and  pressed  them  into  Pharaoh's 
cup,  and  I  gave  the  cup  into  Pharaoh's  hand." — Gen. 
xl.  9—11. 

The  one  idea  of  the  tiUler'^s  release  will  explain 
all  the  symbols  here.  Or  the  following  one  of  the 
baker : 

"  When  the  chief  baker  saw  that  the  interpre- 
tation was  good,  he  said  unto  Joseph,  I  also  was 
in  my  dream,  and  behold,  I  had  three  white  baskets 
on  my  head :  and  in  the  uppermost  basket  there  was 
of  all  manner  of  bake  meats  for  Pharaoh :  and  the 
birds  did  eat  them  out  of  the  basket  upon  my  head." 
—Gen.  xL  16,  17. 

The  one  idea  of  the  haher^s  execution  will  here  also 
determine  the  significations  of  the  separate  symbols. 


UNITY   OF   THE   ALLEGORY.  4:3 

The  same  powerful  solvent  will  resolve  the  mystery 
of  every  symbolic  prophecy  in  the  Old  Testament. 
Thus  "  the  relation  of  the  kingdom  of  God  to  tlie 
four  great  world-dominions,"  is  the  one  idea  which 
will  unlock  the  mystery  of  Daniel's  twofold  prophecy, 
eh.  ii.  and  vii.  "  The  existence  of  the  four  world- 
empires,"  is  the  one  idea  which  will  solve  Zechariah's 
prophecy  of  the  Four  Chariots,  ch.  vi.  The  restora- 
tion of  the  Jews  is  the  key  to  all  this  prophet's  pre- 
dictions contained  in  ch.  i. 

But,  if  this  principle  be  so  powerful,  why—it  may 
be  asked — is  it  not  eflective  to  solve  the  profound 
mystery  which  still  inheres  in  the  Eevelation  ?  Tlie 
answer  to  this  question  is  at  hand — it  has  never  been 
applied.  It  will  effectually  solve  this  mystery  too,  as 
well  as  all  other  allegoric  mysteries,  provided  it  be 
adhered  to ;  it  will  not,  if  it  be  departed  from,  nor 
will  it,  unless  the  true  idea  be  assumed  and  apj^liecl. 
And  it  is  not  reasonable  to  expect  success  otherwise. 
!N"ow,  we  hesitate  not  to  say,  that  if  the  relation  of 
the  fourth  world-dominion  to  the  Jcingdom  of  God 
be  taken  as  the  One  Idea  of  the  allegory,  and  rigidly 
adhered  to  in  the  interpretation,  it  will  j^ut  to  flight, 
as  will  the  light  of  a  sunbeam,  all  that  Cimmerian 
darkness  which  has  hitherto  involved  the  prophecy. 
The  prophecy  will  stand  forth  thereafter  and  forever 
in  a  robe  of  light.  This  idea  has,  indeed,  been  gen- 
erally admitted  to  be  the  main  one,  but  it  has  not 
been  admitted  to  be  the  sole  one.  Here  a  fatal  error 
has  been  committed,  for  the  value  of  the  idea  in  so 
far  as  its  oneness  is  concerned,  which  is  its  sole  value. 


4:4:  UNITY   OF  THE  ALLEGORY. 

is  vitiated  by  the  comjDromise,  and  the  unity  of  the 
allegory  is,  in  consequence,  destroyed.  The  princi- 
ple cannot  be  said  to  have  been  adhered  to  or  applied 
in  any  proper  sense,  when  Paganism  is  read  in  the 
book,  when  Arianism  is  found  in  it,  or  Mohamme- 
danism, or  infidelity,  or  Popery,  (and  not  the  Papa- 
cy,) or  when  the  resurrection  is  discerned  to  be  in  it, 
or  such  things  as  the  general  judgment  of  all  men, 
heaven,  and  hell,  are  read  therein,  or  when,  perhaps, 
more  fatal  in  its  effects  on  the  book,  the  Devil  or  Sa- 
tan is  found  in  it.  The  resurrection  and  the  final 
judgment,  the  heavenly  state,  and  the  total  destruc- 
tion of  Satan,  which  is  supposed  to  be  represented  in 
eh.  XX.,  can  have  no  bearing  whatever  on  that  07ie 
idea  which  pervades  the  prophecy,  and  which  is  es- 
sentially a  political  idea,  viz.,  the  triumph  of  the 
kingdom  of  God  over  the  fourth  world-dominion. 
The  matters  above  enumerated,  and  many  more  of  a 
similar  kind  which  have  passed  current  as  interpreta- 
tions, thoroughly  destroy  the  unity  of  idea  of  the 
allegor}^  This  becomes  like  a  vessel  broken  into 
pieces.  These  pieces  may  hold  some  drops  of  water, 
but  not  more  than  to  toy  with  the  palate,  to  stimu- 
late,— not  to  quench  the  thirst.  The  capacity  of  the 
prophetic  vessel  to  hold  the  living  waters  of  truth  is 
forever  destroyed  by  the  rupture  of  its  unity.  When 
such  subjects  as  the  above  are  admitted  into  the  book, 
when  mere  symbols  are  held  to  be  interpretations 
which  conflict  with  every  conception  of  the  allegory's 
unity,  this  principle  cannot  be  said  to  have  been  ap- 
plied to  it  in  any  sense  as  a  key  of  explication,  nor  to 


■UNTTY  OF  THE  ALLEGOEY.  45 

have  had  its  real  virtues  tested  in  any  respect.  The 
interpretation  itself  has  not  had  justice  done  to  it. 
That  light  which  enters  every  allegory,  and  which 
must  enter  this  one,  too,  by  the  great  window  of 
"  unity  of  idea,"  has  been  rigorously  excluded  from 
this  great  allegoric  pile,  and  its  mystic  chambers  have 
therefore  been,  if  not  dark,  yet  dim — scarcely,  indeed, 
lighted  up  with  a  "dim  religious  splendor."  The 
consequence  has  been,  that  the  most  pains-taking 
industry  has  not  been  able  to  decipher  the  hiero- 
glyphics on  its  walls. 

But  the  symbolic  prophecies  have  a  second  and 
independent  instrument  of  illumination  in  the  sym- 
bolic language.  The  terms  of  this  organized  lan- 
guage, for  it  is  such,  unquestionably,  throw  no  small 
light  on  the  real  sense  of  the  prophecy  which  is  ex- 
pressed in  it.  But  then  again,  these  hieroglyphics 
acquire  their  chief  precision,  their  definiteness,  and 
certainly  all  their  demonstrative  force,  from  the  per- 
ception of  the  unity  of  the  allegory.  These  hiero- 
glyphic signs,  it  may  with  certainty  be  affirmed,  are 
destitute  of  at  least  one-half  their  power  when  this 
imity  is  not  discovered.  The  following  comparison, 
or  rather  contrast,  for  such  it  is,  w^ill  at  once  show 
the  relative  importance  of  the  former  element  of  in- 
terpretation above  the  other.  Consider  the  parables. 
How  demonstratively  fixed  is  the  sense  of  a  parable, 
solely  in  virtue  of  this  unity.  It  is  from  this  quarter 
that  it  derives  all  its  light.  It  has  no  fixed  senses  to 
lean  upon  at  all.  How  unsatisfactory,  on  the  other 
hand,  has  the  sense  of  the  Eevelation  been,  destitute 


46  UNITY   OF  THE   ALLEGORY. 

of  this  principle  of  illumination,  notwithstanding  the 
known  senses  of  the  greater  number  of  its  hiero- 
glyphics ! 

Unity  of  idea,  then,  we  perceive,  is  an  essential 
principle  of  the  allegory.  It  is  to  the  allegory  what 
the  key-stone  is  to  the  arch.  Without  this  funda- 
mental principle,  an  allegory  is  no  sign — it  is  an  un- 
completed arch — it  is  no  bridge  of  communication  at 
all.  With  it,  it  is  a  real  sign,  a  solid  arch,  a  safe  and 
reliable  bridge  in  every  respect — a  bridge,  also,  which 
has  been  traversed,  in  the  olden  times,  more  than  now- 
adays, by  many  a  vehicle  laden  with  gold.  Many  a 
broad  and  deep-running  stream  has  it  bridged  over, 
and  afforded  a  secure  transit  across  it.  But,  as  a 
bridge,  it  is  useless  unless  the  arch  be  complete — un- 
less it  exhibit  a  perfect  unity. 

We  annex  to  this  chapter  a  table  of  a  few  of  the 
parables  delivered  by  the .  Saviour.  They  form  the 
groundwork  and  reveal  the  principles  of  the  pro- 
phetic allegories ;  they  therefore  may  be  consulted 
with  advantage  to  know  the  constitution  of  the  other. 
The  table  also  shows  the  partial  formation,  under  the 
parable,  of  those  hieroglyphics  in  it  which  have  here 
no  other  key  but  unity  of  idea.  The  prophetic  hiero- 
glyphics have  another  exponent  in  the  known  senses 
of  these  signs.  The  one  is  sufficient  to  explain  the 
parable ;  both  are,  however,  requisite  to  the  explica- 
tion of  the  prophetic  allegory,  which  is  a  much  more 
complicated  piece  of  work  than  the  parable.  The 
former,  it  is  also  to  be  observed,  develops  unity  of 
conception,  both  in  the  subject  of  the  allegory  and  in 


UNITY   OF   THE   ALLEGOET.  47 

the  form  in  wliicli  it  is  cast.  The  principle  is  tliiis 
more  highly  and  more  artistically  developed.  At  the 
same  time,  its  existence  is  sometimes  not  a  little  diffi- 
cult to  descry  in  consequence  of  a  violation  which  the 
symbolic  prophets  sometimes  make  in  the  unity  of  the 
imagery.  The  use  of  a  sign  which  is  diflerent  but 
synonymous  makes  an  apparent  violation  of  unity  of 
idea.  If  we  consider,  however,  that  the  images  are 
here  the  signs,  the  mere  change  of  an  image  does  not 
in  reality  violate  the  unity  more  than  the  use  of  a  dif- 
ferent but  synonymous  word  violates  the  unity  of  a 
sentence.  This  variety  of  imagery  has  undoubtedly 
been  an  obstacle  to  the  interpretation  of  the  Revela- 
tion. This  is  a  book  which  is  peculiarly  rich  in 
synonymous  hieroglyphics,  it  literally  swarms  with 
them  ;  when  these  signs  which  are  synonymous,  are 
looked  upon  as  anti-synonymous,  new  ideas  are  re- 
garded as  developed.  Infringements,  in  consequence, 
are  attributed  to  the  prophet  of  the  main  and  funda- 
mental principle  of  conception.  But  it  is  altogether 
a  false  conclusion  to  draw,  that  because  the  prophet 
uses  a  different  image  or  hieroglyphic,  he  develops 
a  different  idea,  and  violates  the  chain  of  unity.  He 
cannot  do  this,  and  it  is  not  rational  to  suppose  that 
he  does  it.  If  he  did,  he  would  destroy  the  intelligi- 
bility of  his  composition.  This  apparent  violation  of 
unity  of  conception  results  from  the  fact,  that  he 
writes  in  an  organized  language,  the  signs  of  which 
have  definite  senses.  When  he  uses  a  synonymous 
sign,  he  is  no  more  changing  his  idea,  than  an  author, 
when  he  uses  a  synonymous  word.     This  violation  of 


48  UNITY   OF    THE   ALLEGORY. 

the  unity  of  the  imagery  cannot,  liowever,  take  place 
in  the  parable,  for  here  the  senses  of  its  subordinate 
hieroglyphics  are  fixed  by  the  perfect  unity  which 
characterizes  the  first  representation,  and  they  de- 
pend upon  this  unity  for  all  their  significance.  Here, 
accordingly,  an  infringement  of  this  unity  cannot 
take  place.  It  must  be  admitted,  then,  that  this  uni- 
ty of  idea  is  a  more  ready  explicator  of  a  parable, 
because  it  is,  for  the  above  reason,  more  jpercejptible. 
The  chain  of  the  imagery  lifts  the  chain  of  idea.  It 
is,  however,  as  efficient  an  explicator  of  the  prophetic 
allegory,  because  it  is  to  it  equally  indispensable.  It 
is,  however,  more  difficult  to  be  found. 


TABLE    OF    PARABLES.* 


THE  PARABLE. 


HIEKOGLTPU, 

OR 
FIRST  SENSE. 


ANTITYPE, 

OR 

SECOND   SENSE. 


TiTv  Sower  The  sower, £^"**'    ,;, 

^  Matt  luU  3-8  and  18-23.  The  field, The  world. 

The  seed, 

The  fruit, 


The  Vine,  ....... 

John  XV.  1-8. 

The  Leaven, 

Matt.  xiii.  33. 

Growing  Seet>,  . 
Mark  iv.  2t^-29. 

The  Laborers,  . . 
Matt.  XX.  1-16. 


The  Good  Samaritan, 
Luke  X.  25-37. 

The  Relentless  Servant, 
Matt,  xviii.  21-35. 


The  gospeL 
Holiness. 


The  vine, 

The  husbandman,  &,c.. 

The  meal, 

The  woman, 

The  seed, 

The  husbandman, 

Householders, 

Laborers, 

Day, 


The  traveller,. . . 
The  thieves,  &c. 


Christ. 

The  Father,  &c. 

The  heart. 

The  Holy  Spirit. 

The  truth. 

(Not  symbolic,  or  but  par- 
tially.) 
Christ. 
Believers. 
Life-time. 


Man. 

The  trials  of  life,  &e. 


The  Two  Sons,  . . . 
Matt.  xxi.  28-32. 


The  Great  Supper, 
Luke  xiv.  15-24. 


The  king: 

The  servants,  &c. 


The  father, 

The  first  son, 

The  second  son, 

The  householder, . . 

The  supper 

The  first  invited,... 
Second  invitation,. 
Third  invitation. 


God. 
Men,  &c. 

God. 

Publican. 

Pharisees. 

Christ. 

Salvation, 

Jews  "bidden.'' 

Gentiles  "  bidden." 

The  entire  Pa^an  world. 


Highway,  &c Th( 


most  abandoned. 


Light  of  the  "VTorld, 

Matt.  V.  14  '         ^  ,j 

The  Tares  in  the  Wheat.! The  field 

Matt.  xiii.  24-30,  36-43. 
The  Vineyard.; 

Matt.  xii.  33,  34. 


The  world,  &c Mankind,  &c. 


The  householder, 

The  vineyard, 

The  husbandmen, 

Householder's  absence, . 


The  Mustard  Seed, 
Matt.  xiii.  31.  32. 

The  Drag-Net, 

Matt.  xiii.  47-50. 

The  Absent  King,  . 
Luke  xix.  11-27. 


Servants  sent, 

The  son, 

Cast  out  and  slain, . . . 
The  lord's  coming,. . . 
The  vineyard  let  out, . 

The  mustard  seed, . . . 


The  Net, 


The  visible  cburcli. 

God. 

His  kingdom. 

The  Jewish  nation. 

Period  from  Moses  to  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem. 

Succession  of  prophets. 

Christ. 

Christ  slain. 

The  Koman  army. 

The  Gentile  churches  bo- 
come  ascendant. 

Christ's  Church. 

The  Gospel. 


Vl!^!"^^:: ::::::::  i^t'S;^  to  the  judgment 


*  Kirk  on  the  Parables. 


CHAPTEE  y. 

RELATIONS  OF  THE  SYMBOLIC  LANGUAGE  TO  A 
PKOPHETIC  ALLEGOEY. 

The  relations  between  symbolic  or  liieroglypbic 
language  and  prophetic  allegory  are  so  close,  that  it 
is  a  matter  of  no  essential  moment  to  determine  which 
stands  to  the  other  in  the  relation  of  canse  and  effect, 
that  is,  whether  the  hieroglyph  produced  the  allegory 
or  the  allegory  the  hieroglyph.  It  is  sufficient  that, 
as  we  now  lind  them,  they  are  indissolubly  combined. 
There  is  no  prophetic  allegory  without  the  hieroglyph, 
and  there  is  no  prophetic  hieroglyphic  language  with- 
out allegory. 

A  hieroglyph,  or  symbol,  is  a  sign  which  repre- 
sents one  idea,  which  idea  again  represents  another. 
Thus  a  mountain  stands  for  a  kingdom,  or  the  idea  of 
a  mountain  stands  for  the  idea  of  a  kingdom.  In 
general  the  word  hieroglyph  is  aj^plied  to  these  signs 
when  they  are  painted  and  exposed  to  the  eye,  as  in 
the  Egyptian  hieroglyphics.  It  is  clear,  however, 
that  it  is  of  no  material  consequence  whether  ''  the 
mountain"  be  painted,  or  expressed  by  the  word 
mountain,  that  is,  given  in  language  to  be  literally 


RELATIONS    OF   THE   SYI^nJOLIC   LANGUAGE.  61 

taken.  It  is,  in  either  case,  a  hieroglyph,  which, 
whether  painted,  prononncecl,  or  w^ritten,  although 
standing  for  a  mountain  in  the  first  sense,  stands  in 
the  second  and  real  sense  for  a  dominion. 

The  writing  in  ideographic  signs,  or  hieroglyph- 
ics, unquestionably  preceded  the  invention  of  let- 
ters. At  first,  then,  it  was,  and  was  designed  to  be, 
SLii  ope7i  language.  When  the  alphabet  came  to  be 
used,  it  fell  into  desuetude  generally.  It  then  became 
the  sacred  and  secret  language  of  the  Egyptian  priests, 
in  which  they  expressed  the  hidden  mysteries  of  their 
religion.  It  was  chosen  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  doubt- 
less for  wise  ends,  as  the  vehicle  for  conveying  his 
prophetic  revelations — being  a  mode  of  writing  in 
which  the  signs  have  a  sense  at  once  secret  and  defi- 
nite. 

It  is  indubitable  that  the  ancient  hieroglyphics  of 
the  Egyptians,  and  also  those  of  the  Hebrew  j^rophets, 
derived  their  origin  from  certain  natural  resemblances 
which  held  between  one  idea  and  another,  and  there- 
fore that  they  had  the  same  basis  as  ordinary  figura- 
tive or  metaphoric  language.  Thus  a  mountain, 
which  is  a  vast  object,  and  which  towers  above  and 
commands  the  territory  that  lies  around  its  base,  bears 
a  natural  resemblance  to  a  kingdom  or  dominion. 
Accordingly  this  very  hieroglyph  is  frequently  incor- 
porated into  the  figurative  language  of  the  prophets. 
Isaiah  says,  speaking  of  the  future  universal  suprem- 
acy of  the  kingdom  of  God,  "  And  it  shall  come  to 
I  pass  in  the  last  days,  that  the  mountain  of  the  Lord's 
house  (the  kingdom  of  the  Lord)  shall  be  established 


52  RELATIONS    OF   THE    SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE. 

in  the  top  of  the  mountains,  (elevated  above  all  king- 
doms,) and  shall  be  exalted  above  the  hills,  (the  lesser 
kingdoms  ;)  and  all  nations  shall  flow  imto  it." 
Is.  ii.  2. 

Between  allegory  and  hieroglyph  there  is  no  real 
difference,  except  that  the  former  always  contains  a 
whole  and  complete  representation,  while  the  latter  is 
frequently  used  to  express  a  part  of  one.  They  are 
ideographic  signs,  containing  a  second  sense,  which  is 
not  developed.  Every  allegory  may  be  regarded  as 
a  great  hieroglyph,  containing  more  or  fewer  hiero- 
glyphs under  it.  These  signs  are  sometimes  expressed, 
as  has  been  observed,  in  painting,  instead  of  being 
written  or  spoken.  This  is  a  mode  of  notation  entirely 
german  to  their  nature  2i'S>  2^icto7'ial  signs. 

An  allegor}^  of  considerable  length  may  be  the 
sign  and  the  hieroglyph  of  scarcely  more  than  a  single 
idea.  This  may  be  called  a  simple  allegory.  Such 
is  the  parable  or  allegory  of  the  good  Samaritan. 
The  principal  part  of  the  representation  is  here  to  be 
accepted  in  its  literal  sense,  and  there  is  but  one  main 
hieroglyph  in  it,  the  occult  idea,  which  the  allegory, 
taken  as  a  whole,  represents.  This  may  be  expressed 
to  be,  "True  benevolence  contrasted  with  hypocritical 
religion."  The  greater  number  of  the  parables  of 
Christ  come  less  or  more  under  the  head  of  allegories 
of  this  kind.  The  greater  portion  of  the  representa- 
tion has  nothing  beyond  the  first  and  literal  sense,  the 
second  sense  is  either  entirely,  or  to  a  very  great 
extent,  excluded  from  the  subordinate  parts,  and  lies 
mainly  in  the  representation  taken  as  a  whole.  There 


EELATI0N3    OF   THE   SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE.  63 

are  others  again  in  wliicli  the  first  representation  is 
not  wholly,  or  even  chiefij,  to  be  accepted  literal  1}^, 
but  which  contain  hieroglyphs  subordinate  to  the 
main  hieroglyph  of  the  allegory.  Of  this  kind  the 
parable  of  the  vine  is  an  example.  It  is,  b}^  the  ex- 
planation which  accompanies  it,  reduced  to  the  estate 
of  a  fio'iire  as  it  stands  on  the  record.  For  the  sake 
of  illustration  we  shall  express  it  in  the  strict  form  of 
the  allegor}^ :  "  There  is  a  vine  and  there  is  a  hus- 
bandman ;  and  every  branch  in  this  vine  that  bear- 
etli  not  fruit,  the  husbandman  taketh  away  ;  and 
every  branch  that  beareth  fruit,  the  husbandman 
j)urgeth,  that  it  may  bring  forth  more  fruit."  Here 
there  are  several  subordinate  hieroglyphs  :  the  vine 
is  a  hieroglypli  of  Christ  ;^  the  husbandman,  of  the 
Father  ;  the  branches,  of  Christ's  nominal  disciples ; 
the  fruit,  of  the  good  works  which  his  true  disciples 
do,  &c.  The  hieroglyph  which  the  allegorj-,  taken 
as  a  whole,  contains,  may  be  expressed  as  "  The  union 
of  Christ  with  the  good  members  of  his  kingdom  and 
the  excision  of  the  bad."  To  this  necessarily  the  sub- 
ordinate hieroglyphs  stand  in  the  closest  relationship, 
and  the  sense  which  they  bear  is  in  each  case  fixed  by 
a  reference  to  that  of  the  main  and  leading  hiero- 
glyph which  the  allegory  forms  as  a  whole.  Every 
allegory,  then,  is  a  great  hieroglyph  in  itself.  When 
the  allegorical  element  is  in  excess,  it  becomes  the 
constructor  of  many  subordinate  hieroglyphs. 

It  is  thus  apparent  that  as  soon  as  we  begin  to 
allegorize,  we  begin  to  form  a  hieroglyphic  language. 
In  general,  however,  this  language  is  created  only  for 


5-i  RELATIONS    OF   THE   SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE. 

the  occasion.  Its  signs  have  no  fixed  and  definite 
senses  external  to  the  particular  allegory  in  which 
they  are  employed. 

But  when  we  come  to  look  at  the  prophetic  alle- 
gories, we  find  this  hieroglyphical  element  formed 
into  a  language  regularly  organized.  Definite  sig- 
nifications are  attached  to  the  hieroglyphic  signs  by 
a  system  of  interpretations  rendered,  which  consti- 
tute a  species  of  lexicon,  while  the  whole  army  of 
signs  is  placed  under  the  discipline  of  laws  resting 
npon  the  groundwork  of  precedent.  This  is  a  new 
feature. 

These  allegories  also  show  the  hieroglyphic  ele- 
ment developed  in  a  much  stronger  degree  than  in 
the  parables.  Thus  the  prophecies  of  the  Image  of 
Daniel,  ch.  ii.,  and  of  the  Four  Beasts  of  the  same 
prophet,  ch.  vii.,  are  intensely  allegoric :.  they  are  full 
of  hieroglyphs,  as  we  learn  from  the  interpretations. 
This  character  of  them  is  readily  discernible  from  the 
violation  done  to  the  naturalness  of  the  representa- 
tion. This  is  a  feature  which  never  takes  place  where 
the  allegoric  element  is  weak.  It  results  from  an  ex- 
cess of  the  hieroglyphic  element,  which  compromises 
more  or  less  the  congruity  and  connection  of  the 
various  parts  of  the  representation.  How  smoothly 
and  naturally  flow  the  parables,  in  which  the  allegory 
is  not  strong,  and  whicli  are  never  strained  to  bear  a 
second  sense.  How  incongruous  and  perplexed,  in 
comparison,  is  the  composition  of  a  symbolic  proph- 
ecy. The  greater  part  of  the  representation  is  here 
pregnant  with   enigma   and   a  second  sense.     This 


KELATIONS    OF   THE    SYIMBOLIC   LANGUAGE.  55 

feature  materially  enhances  tlie  difficulty  of  interpre- 
tation. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  task  of  decipherment  is 
facilitated,  and  its  result  confirmed,  by  the  fixed  and 
definite  significations  attached  to  the  hieroglyphic 
signs.  The  sense  of  these  rests  on  a  double  basis  of 
proof.  It  rests  first  on  that  of  interpretations  render- 
ed, investing  each  sign  with  a  definite  signification ; 
and  it  rests,  secondly,  on  the  basis  of  that  relationship 
which  the  subordinate  hieroglyph  necessarily  bears 
to  that  great  IIierogly]3h  which  is  constituted  by  the 
allegory  as  a  whole.  Take  the  following  example: 
We  know  from  Daniel  that  a  Beast  with  horns  on  it 
is  the  symbol  of  a  great  empire.  Such  a  beast  occurs 
in  the  Revelation,  in  the  form  of  the  Ten-horned 
Dragon,  and  of  the  Ten-horned  Beast.  Both  of  these 
beasts  are  necessarily  symbols  of  empires.  But  of 
what  empires?  The  unity  of  idea,  which  we  have 
proved  to  be  an  essential  principle  of  the  allegory, 
answers  this  question.  K  the  allegory's  unity  of  idea 
is  the  "  relationship  of  the  fourth  dominion  of  the  world 
to  the  kingdom  of  God,"  then  the  Dragon  and  the 
Beast  are  necessarily  symbols  of  the  Boman  domin- 
ion, for  this  is  the  fourth.  The  general  signification 
of  the  hieroglyphic  sign  is  thus  twice  proved,  while 
its  imrticidar  application  is  fixed  demonstratively  by 
that  unity  of  idea  which  is  inherent  in  the  allegory. 

The  same  argument  will  fix  the  signification  of 
the  Horsemen  of  the  First  Four  Seals.  The  interpre- 
tation of  the  Four  Chariots  of  Zechariah,  cli.  vi., 
which  determines  them  to  be  dominions,  proves  the 


56  RELATIONS   OF  THE   SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE. 

correspondent  symbol,  the  Four  Cavalry-men  of  the 
Revelation,  as  the  Horsemen  may  with  propriety  be 
called,  to  be  dominions  likewise.  What  the  chariot 
was  in  war  when  Zechariah  wrote,  the  cavalry-man 
was  in  war  when  John  wrote.  The  symbols,  if  not 
identical,  are  strictly  analogous.  The  general  sense 
of  both  is  in  a  hieroglyphic  language  necessarily  the 
same.  If  the  First  Horseman  represents  the  king- 
dom of  God,  which  can  hardly  be  disputed,  then  the 
unity  of  idea  which  prevails  in  the  allegory  neces- 
sitates the  conclusion  that  the  three  other  horsemen 
are  symbols  of  E-oman  dominions.  The  allegory's 
unity,  accordingly,  is  an  elucidator  of  no  despicable 
or  insignificant  power.  It  is  plainly  an  interpreter 
of  the  first  rank — it  may,  with  propriety,  be  called 
the  presiding  genius  of  interpretation.  There  is  no 
instrument  so  powerful  as  this  is,  in  unlocking  the 
mystery  of  an  allegory.  But  it  is  an  instrument 
which  has  not  yet  been  applied  to  any  extent  to  the 
Revelation.  Can  the  interpretation,  then,  of  this  book, 
be  said  to  have  been  yet  properly  entered  upon  ? 

The  signification  of  the  subordinate  hieroglyphs, 
then,  in  a  prophetic  allegory,  is  in  each  case  subject- 
ed to  the  operation  of  a  double  index  and  check.  The 
effect  of  this  twofold  instrument,  for  such  it  is,  in  at 
once  pointing  out  and  demonstrating,  in  restraining 
and  confirming,  the  particular  sense  of  an  individual 
symbol,  is  self-evident.  The  interpreted  sense  must 
stand  in  agreement  at  once  with  the  well-known  sense 
of  the  hieroglyph,  and  at  the  same  time  with  that 
which  is  derivative  from  that  unity  of  idea  which  is 


EELATIONS   OF  THE   SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE.  57 

a  fundamental  principle  and  an  inalienable  pre- 
rogative of  the  allegory.  It  is  indeed  a  prerogative 
of^'which  the  Kevelation  has  been  deprived,  but  not 
"vvith  justice. 

The  hieroglyphic  language  of  Scripture,  then,  m 
virtue  of  the 'interpretations  rendered  of  it,  and  the 
restraining  influence  of  the  allegory  in  which  it  ap- 
pears, may  justly  be  regarded  as  possessing,  if  not  the 
precision,"  all,  nay  more,  than  the  definiteness  of 
literal  language. 

In  respect  of  its  first  element  of  strength,  its  in- 
terpreted character,  it  is  indeed  nothing  more  than 
literal  language  written  in  ciplier,    and  it  is  unqnes- 
tionably  no  less  definite.     It  consists  of  literal  words, 
the  significations  of  which  are  inverted,  so  as  to  form 
out  of  these  a  new  and  independent  language,  as  dif- 
ferent  from   literal   as   one   spoken   tongue   is  from 
another.     Its  signs  are  to  be  regarded  in  much  the 
same  light  as  the  signs  of  a  cypher  alphabet.     Snch 
an  alphabet  does  not  begin  with  the  letter  a,  but  it 
begins,  say,  for  example,  with   the  letter  m,  which 
stands  for  a,  n  standing  for  I,  and  so  on.     Such  an 
alphabet  contains  signs  quite  as  definite  in  their  sig- 
nifications as  the  common  one.     It  is  an  incomprehen- 
sible code  of  signs,  however,  to  all  those  who  are  not 
in  possession  of  the  key  to  its  cipher.     In  respect  to 
the  prophetic  hieroglyphics,  Scripture  has  furmshed 
ns  with  a  suflicient  key.     Whatever  reason  we  may 
have  to  accuse  our  own  inactivity  in  the  application 
which  we  make  of  it,  we  certainly  have  no  reason  to 
question,  on  the  mere  ground  of  the  divergence  of 


58  RELATIONS   OF   THE   STIMBOLIC   LANGUAGE. 

these  signs  from  those  of  literal  language,  their  right 
to  be  held  a  mode  of  commmiication  perfectly  intel- 
ligible. This  language  possesses  a  second  element  of 
strength,  in  the  unity  of  the  subject  expressed  in  it — 
an  element  peculiar  to  itself  as  a  cipher  language. 

This  character  of  the  hieroglyphic  as  a  cipher  lan- 
guage^ is  of  the  highest  importance  :  because,  in  virtue 
of  this  quality,  it  possesses  all  the  definiteness  which 
the  signs  of  literal  language  possess ;  and  in  virtue  of 
it,  it  is  another  language,  and  requires  translation. 
In  this  respect  it  is  widely  different  from  what  is 
called  figurative  language,  or  what  is,  wdth  greater 
propriety  of  expression,  denominated  language  con- 
taining figures.  This  has  no  real  claim  to  be  reck- 
oned a  language  distinct  from  literal,  although  we 
have  considered  it  as  such  on  the  ground  of  its  con- 
sisting of  ideographic  signs. 

Let  us  compare,  or  rather  contrast,  the  hiero- 
glyjMc,  whicii  is  another  language  distinct  from 
literal,  with  this  figurative  language,  which  is  really 
not  another  language,  distinct  from  it,  but  which  is 
combined  and  identified  with  it.  This  practical  com- 
bination and  amalgamation  of  figurative  with  literal 
language,  is  amply  proved  by  the  circumstance  of  its 
requiring  no  translation.  Were  it  in  any  practical 
sense  distinct  from  the  latter,  it  w^ould  stand  in  need 
of  interpretation,  which  it  never  does. 

The  development  of  this  contrast  will  have  the 
most  important  bearing  on  the  interpretation  of  the 
Revelation. 

A  recent  writer  remarks  :  "  When  we  reflect  on 


RELATIONS    OF   THE    SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE.  59 

the  number  and  talents  of  the  men  who  have  at- 
tempted to  illustrate  the  visions  of  St.  John,  and  the 
great  discordance  of  opinions,  it  would  seem  as  if 
there  tnust  he  something  radically  wrong,  some  fatal 
error^  at  the  "cery  foundation  of  all  their  systems  of 
explanation,  which  is  one  great  cause  of  the  mistakes 
and  confusion  that  appear  to  pervade  them  all.  What 
this  is,  deserves  to  he  maturely  considered^ 

It  can  hardljbe  questioned  that  snch  a  fatal  error 
exists.  Now  it  appears  to  ns  that  this  fatal  error, 
which  must  lie  at  the  foundation  of  all  systems  of  in- 
terpretation hitherto  pursued,  mainly  is  the  attempt 
to  explain  the  book  on  the  basis  of  figurative  lan- 
guage. In  a  few  subsequent  remarks  we  shall  call 
attention  to  the  positive  absurdity  involved  in  such 
an  attempt.  In  the  mean  time  let  us  notice  the  nega- 
tive disadvantages  of  pursuing  such  a  course.  The 
interpretation  is  deprived  by  it  of  the  following  ele- 
ments of  exp>lication,  which  are  unfolded  in  the  sym- 
bolic language  of  Scripture,  but  of  which  there  is  not 
a  trace  in  its  figurative  language  : 

l^ii^.  Unity  of  idea  in  the  composition. 

2cZ.  The  origination  of  the  subject  from  a  common 
source. 

?>d.  Eeduplication  or  doubling  of  the  revelation 
made. 

^tli.  Structure  of  the  representation  in  the  quater- 
nal  form. 

These  four  instruments  of  explication  are  clearly 
derivative  from  hieroglyphic  Scripture,  as  will  be 
shown  afterwards,  but  not  one  of  them  has  yet  been 


60  RELATIONS   OF  THE   SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE. 

applied,  so  far  as  we  know,  to  the  book  of  E-evelation. 
Why  ?  because  they  have  no  existence  in  the  figura- 
tive prophets.  They  are  developed,  however,  by  the 
symbolic  prophets.  Unfortunately,  no  right  distinc- 
tion has  been  drawn  between  these  two  very  different 
species  of  prophets,  and  the  Hevelation,  which  be- 
longs to  the  latter  class,  has  never  yet  had  the  true 
principles  of  symbolic  writing  applied  to  it.  IS'ow, 
if  the  four  principles  above  mentioned  are  fundamen- 
tal to  the  art  of  symbolical  writing,  which  will  be 
shown,  they  certainly  are  followed  by  John,  and  the 
application  of  them  is  certainly  requisite  to  the  inter- 
pretation of  his  book. 

But  when  we  examine  these  principles  more  nar- 
rowly, we  find  them  to  be  of  such  magnitude,  that 
the  want  of  them  may  fairly  be  characterized  as  that 
fatal  error  in  interpretation  of  which  the  above 
writer  speaks.  If  the  principles  are  important,  and 
if  they  have  not  been  applied,  it  is  very  evident  that 
a  fatal  error,  or,  at  least,  a  fatal  omission,  has  been 
committed  ;  and  an  omission  here  is  equivalent  to  an 
error,  since  it  leads  to  error. 

How  important  are  these  principles?  The  first 
two  express  unity  of  conception  in  the  subject  and  its 
composition  ;  here  is  one  great  source  of  light,  which 
sends  its  beams  from  first  to  last  of  the  composition. 
The  influence  of  the  third  principle  is  scarcely  in- 
ferior ;  this  subject,  which  is  one^  is  ticice  unfolded. 
Have  we  failed  to  see  its  unity  of  idea,  that  main  key, 
in  the  first  development  ?  it  may  be  apprehended  in 
the  second.     Have  we  missed  it  in  the  second  ?  it  may 


EELATIONS    OF   THE   SYMBOLIC    LANGUAGE.  61 

be  discovered  in  the  first.  Have  we  seen  it  in  both 
versions  ?  the  result  is  confirmed  and  demonstrated  by 
the  reduplication.  Are  we  perplexed  by  some  insol- 
uble detail  in  the  first  version  ?  the  corresponding 
part  of  the  second  copy  may  resolve  the  difliculty. 
As  we  proceed  in  our  exposition  we  are,  through  it, 
at  all  times  accompanied  at  once  by  a  guide  and  a 
corrector.  Will  any  one  dispute  that  the  douhle  ver- 
sion is  a  powerful  principle  of  interpretation  ?  yet 
it  has  not  yet  been  applied  to  the  Kevelation.  Why  ? 
•without  doubt  chiefly  because  this  book  has  been  con- 
ceived to  be  written  in  figurative  language,  and  figura- 
tive language  contains  no  such  principle.  The  fourth 
is  also  one  of  great  value.  However  long  and  intri- 
cate the  composition  may  be,  it  puts  into  our  hands 
an  efiicient  clue  to  its  plan  and  design.  The  subject 
which  is  marked  witli  unity  will,  according  to  it, 
exhibit  a  fourfold  division,  and  the  actors  in  the  ])lot 
developed  will  be  four  in  number.  However  multi- 
farious the  representations  may  be,  there  is  here  a 
principle  of  order  and  arrangement  second  alone 
to  that  which  is  furnished  by  the  double  vei'sion. 
Neither  has  this  principle  been  applied  to  the  Reve- 
lation. On  what  ground  ?  Unquestionably  on  the 
same  which  has  been  already  stated.  The  quaternal 
form  of  representation  is  a  principle  of  symbolic  and 
not  at  all  of  figurative  writing.  But  the  principles 
of  the  latter  have  been  applied  to  the  Revelation, 
which  belong  to  the  former.  Is  there  not  here  an 
error  of  such  a  magnitude  as  to  be  fatal  to  any  inter- 
pretation of  the  book  which  is  subjected  to  it? 


62  RELATIONS   OF   THE   SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE. 

Let  ns  closelj  scan  tins  symbolic  or  allegoric  lan- 
guage, which  is  so  essentially  different  from  figura- 
tive. 

"When  we  speak  of  allegoric  language  we  mean 
that  w^hich  the  allegory  naturally  forms  under  the 
governing  and  plastic  power  of  that  great  principle 
of  unity  of  idea  which  is  the  central  principle  of  the 
allegory  itself;  the  parables  have  no  other  than  this 
allegoric  language,  thus  simply  formed  to  sustain  their 
meaning.  When  w^e  speak  of  symbolical  or  hiero- 
glyphic language,  we  mean  this  same  language  reduced 
to  an  organized  system  through  the  interpretations 
rendered  of  it  in  Scripture,  and  employed  in  this  or- 
ganized form  as  the  vehicle  of  prophecy.  This  lan- 
guage has  two  expository  principles. 

1st.  The  allegory,  with  unity  of  idea  characteriz- 
ing it,  and 

2cl.  The  definite  significations  of  the  hieroglyphs 
as  fixed  in  Scripture. 

These  two  principles  must  act  in  unison  and  lend 
mutual  aid  in  fixing  the  sense  of  each  hieroglj^ph.  A 
symbol  and  a  hieroglyph  we  regard  as  the  same.  The 
allegory  itself,  expressing  unity  of  idea,  may  thus  be 
regarded  as  one  great  hieroglyph,  containing  subordi- 
nate hieroglyphs  under  it.  These  bear  independent 
badges  of  authority,  but  they  acknowledge  the  su- 
preme power  of  the  allegorj^'s  unity  of  idea.  Sucli 
w^e  believe  to  be  the  organization  of  the  j)rophetic 
symbolic  language,  and  it  has  every  claim  to  be  re- 
garded a  more  perfect  organization  than  ever  came 
from  the  hand  of  man.     E"othing  can  surpass  it^  in 


KELATIOXS   OF   THE   SY^klBOLIC    LANGUAGE.  63 

affixing  not  only  a  definite,  but  a  demonstrative  signi- 
fication to  the  sign. 

But  what  is  that  wliicli  is  called  figurative  or 
metaplioric  language  ?  The  difi'erence  between  this 
and  the  above  lies  in  that  which  holds  between  alle- 
gory and  figure.  This  is  a  very  obvious  conclusion, 
since  the  former  language  is  the  medium  of  an  alle- 
gory, and  the  latter  is  the  medium  of  a  figure.  It  is 
only  necessary,  then,  in  order  to  distinguish  betw^een 
these  two  'media  of  conwiunication^  which  we  have 
denominated  by  the  name  of  languages  for  the  want 
of  a  better  term,  to  observe  the  difference  between 
allegory  and  figure.  AYhat  is  the  difference  ?  We 
have  already  ascertained  it.  It  has  been  seen  that 
the  former  is  a  close  or  shut  ideographic  sign  reserv- 
ing, hiding,  and  concealing  the  second  sense.  The 
latter  is  an  open  ideographic  sign,  developing  the 
second  as  well  as  the  first  sense,  explaining  itself, 
concealing  nothing,  and,  in  this  respect,  not  diflering 
at  all  from  any  of  the  signs  of  literal  language,  since 
there  is,  in  every  case,  a  reduction  to  the  literal  sense. 
It  is  in  virtue  of  this  quality  of  secrecy  which  it  pos- 
sesses, tliat  the  symbolic  is  another  language  which  re- 
quires a  translation  into  the  literal  idiom;  it  is  in 
virtue  of  this  quality  of  ojyenness,  that  the  figurative  is 
not  another  language,  and  it  requires  no  translation. 
In  the  former  an  inversion  is  made  of  ordinary  words 
and  phrases,  so  as  to  form  out  of  these  a  new  and 
secret  language — secret  because  the  inverted  words 
express  but  the  one-half  of  their  true  meaning ;  in 
the  latter  an  inversion  is  also  made — the  first  half  of 


64:  EELATIONS   OF  THE   STI^IBOLIC   LANGUAGE. 

the  sign  is  developed,  wliich  makes  tlie  inversion ; 
but  a  re-inversion  is  also  made — the  second  half  of 
tlie  sign  is  developed,  which  undoes  the  inversion. 
The  inversion  is  thus  practically  disannulled,  and  the 
result  is  that  no  new  language  is  formed  differing 
from  the  literal.  If  the  re-inversion,  that  is,  the  ex- 
planation, is  not  fully  made,  the  figurative  language 
is  bad. 

The  symbolic  or  hieroglyphic,  then,  is  an  occult 
language  demanding  interpretation  ;  figurative  is  al- 
ready interpreted,  is  clear  and  at  once  intelligible. 
The  one  is  a  language  within  itself,  as  difi'erent  from 
literal  lano^uao^e  as  Hebrew  is  from  Greek.  It  con- 
tains  in  it  words  bearing  an  ideographic  sense,  which 
is  dilferent  from  the  literal,  and  this  real  sense  is  not 
developed  in  it ;  at  least,  it  is  neither  the  princij^le 
nor  is  it  the  practice  of  tlie  language  to  afford  this 
development.  Figurative  language  consists  of  words 
bearing  also  an  ideograpliic  sense  distinct  from  the 
literal,  but  the  figurative  words  are,  in  all  cases, 
translated  from  their  literal  to  their  real  sense  by  the 
context.  They  are  to  be  regarded  as  quotations  from 
another  language,  the  translation  of  which  is  ap- 
pended. The  one,  then,  is  an  oj?e}i  language,  the  other 
is  a  shut.  The  two  languages,  then,  are,  in  this  respect, 
wide  as  the  poles  asunder,  for  it  is  the  purpose  of  the 
one  to  express  the  true  meaning,  and  it  is  the  design 
of  the  other  to  conceal  it.  If  a  hieroglyph  is  not 
dark,  that  is,  if  it  tells  all  its  meaning,  it  is  no  hiero- 
glyph ;  if  a  figure  is  not  clear,  that  is,  if  it  does  not 
tell  all  its  meaning,  it  is  unfaithful  to  its  own  nature 


RELATIONS    OF   THE   SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE.  65 

and  constitution.  From  this  distinction  there  results 
a  wide  diiierence  between  the  constitution  of  hiero- 
glyphs and  figures,  viewed  as  signs. 

Figures  or  metaphors  cannot,  like  hieroglyphs,  be 
regarcfcd  as  of  the  nature  of  fixed  signs  at  all ;  they 
are  created  for  a  particular  occasion,  and  they  evanish 
with  it ;  their  significations  are  necessarily  shifting  and 
various' and  dependent  on  the  context.     Hieroglyphic 
signs  form  an  independent  language,  and  in  virtue  of 
tlfeir  doing  this,  they  necessarily  bear  fixed  significa- 
tions.    They  are  also  amenable  to  those  laws  founded 
in  the  character  of  the  mind  itself,  to  which  every 
human  language,  that  stands  on  an  independent  basis, 
must  be  subjected.     They  accordingly  have  theircode 
of  laws  bv  which  they  are  governed  ;  figures  are  not 
amenable\o  any  laws,  not  even  to  the  fundamental 
one  of  ^tnity  of  idea,  which  the  figure  may  violate 
without,  at  least,  any  peril  to  its  existence,  although 
the  violation  will  always  mar  its  beauty.  ^  There  is 
only  one  condition  which  this  sign  must  fulfil ;  it  must 
be  'at  once  intelligiUe  ;  but  this  is  the  very  condition 
which  the  hieroglyph  must  avoid. 

It  is  perfectly  obvious  from  what  has  been  said, 
that  the  signification  of  a  figure  or  metaphor,  (for  these 
words  are  synonymous,)  cannot  be  taken  in  any  safe 
or  reliable  sense  as  the  exponent  of  a  hieroglyph  or  a 
symbol,  which  may  also  be  used  synonymously.  It 
is  very  true  that  the  significations  of  both  do  fre- 
quently accord— an  accordance  which  is  sufficient- 
ly natural,  inasmuch  as  they  are  both  ideographic 
siijns,  the  basis  of  which  is  the  natural  resemblances 


66  RELATIONS    OF   THE    SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE. 

of  things.  On  the  ground  of  tliis  general  agreement, 
a  probable  conclusion  may  be  drawn  from  tli-e  known 
sense  of  a  figure  to  the  unknown  sense  of  a  hieroglyph. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  sense  is  not  unfrequently 
at  variance,  while  in  all  cases  the  signification  of  the 
figure  is,  as  above  said,  indefinite,  and  subject  to  tlie 
context.  There  is  always  an  important  latitude  at- 
tachable to  its  sense.  It  is  not  a  sign  bearing  a  fixed 
and  stereotj'ped  signification  ;  it  is  simply  a  picture 
drawn  for  the  purpose  of  illustrating  the  subject  in 
hand,  and,  as  a  sign,  has  no  real  validity  beyond  this. 

But  when  the  sense  of  a  prophetic  hieroglyph  or 
symbol  is  known  through  an  ex]3ress  interpretation 
rendered  in  Scripture,  there  is  a  positive  certainty 
that  the  same  sense  will  attach  to  it  wherever  it  ap- 
pears ;  at  least,  there  is  as  great  a  certainty  to  this 
efi'ect,  as  that  the  sense  of  a  word,  in  common  lan- 
guage, will  remain  unchanged.  The  symbolic  is,  as  it 
has  been  seen,  a  language  distinct  within  itself,  con- 
structed by  the  inversion  of  the  w^ords  of  ordinary 
speech  ;  being  a  distinct  and  independent  language, 
its  signs  ai-e  necessai-ily  unchangeable,  and  that  law, 
which  is  fundamental  to  every  language,  prevails  in 
it,  that  the  same  sign  bears  the  same  signification. 
The  figurative  is  not,  in  any  sense,  such  a  language  ; 
there  is  not  the  slightest  necessity,  accordingly,  that 
its  signs  should  bear  unchangeable  significations. 

The  distinction  above  drawn  is  a  highly  important 
one,  for  it  sweeps  away,  at  once,  the  whole  of  figura- 
tive language  as  a  basis  of  interpretation  for  the  sym- 
bolic.    The  two  are  essentially  different,  and,  accord- 


RELATIONS    OF   THE    SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE.  67 

ingl}^,   the  one  can   be  no  proper  exponent  of  tlie 
other. 

It  is  perfectly  obvious,  then,  from  what  has  been 
said,  that  the  interpretations  rendered  in  Scripture, 
and  the  known  senses  attached  to  the  hierogl^^phics 
by  the  prophets  who  employ  them,  as  signs  of  that 
distinct  and  independent  language  which  they  con- 
stitute, can  alone  form  the  groundwork  of  a  valid  in- 
terpretation of  the  Eevelation.  This  book  is  written 
in  hieroglyphic,  and  not  in  figurative  language,  as 
the  structure  and  materials  of  the  whole  composition 
show,  and  as  the  interpretation  in  ch.  xvii.  conclu- 
sively proves.  If  written  in  figurative  language,  it 
cannot  be  considered  as  any  thing  else  than  an  incom- 
prehensible rhapsody  and  a  farrago  of  imagery,  very 
ill-assorted.  It  is  impossible  to  regard  it  in  any  other 
light  but  this.  Such  it  has  long  been  held  by  infidels 
to  be.  Alas  !  that  Christians  should  have  labored 
with  untiring  efiorts,  to  prove  that  it  was  nothing 
better,  and  to  bring  its  interpretation  into  the  merited 
contempt  of  all  men  of  sound  understanding.  But 
could  any  other  result  follow  from  the  course  which 
has  been  pursued  ?  This  course  develops  the  very 
same  absurdity  as  would  be  incurred  in  the  attempt, 
could  the  attempt  be  conceived  to  be  made,  to  inter- 
pret a  Greek  book  by  the  aid  of  a  Hebrew  lexicon. 
The  Kevelation  is  written  in  hieroglyphic  language, 
and  its  interpretation  is  striven  to  be  accomplished 
by  figurative  and  even  literal  language.  The  result 
is  only  that  which  might  naturally  have  been  ex- 
pected— the  interpretations  are  legion  in  number,  and 


68  RELATIONS   OF   THE   SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE. 

thej  are  worthless  in  value.  The  ]3rophecy  itself  is 
thus  placed  in  the  unfortunate  condition  of  a  book 
which  is  not  written  in  any.  language  :  for  the  lan- 
guage in  which  it  actually  is  written  has  been  dis- 
solved in  the  menstruum  of  another,  and  is,  therefore, 
totally  annihilated.  It  is  fortunate  that  there  are 
some  who  have  not  carried  out  this  mode  of  interpre- 
tation to  its  fall  extent,  that  through  them  a  cor- 
rective has  been  partially  administered,  and  some 
grains  of  truth  have  been  saved  from  destruction. 

It  is  not  saying  too  much,  to  affirm,  that  the  sense 
of  the  Kevelation  would  have  been  at  the  present  day 
infinitely  more  clear,  if  not  a  single  citation  had  been 
made  from  figurative  Scripture.  Had  interpreters 
confined  themselves  to  the  strictly  hieroglyphic  writ- 
ings of  the  Bible  in  their  endeavors  to  elucidate  it, 
Ave  might  still  have  seen  a  variety  of  application  in 
regard  to  details,  but  we  should  have  seen  but  one 
main  and  general  sense.  Even  the  applications  them- 
selves, had  this  course  been  followed,  would  have 
been  necessarily  limited  within  a  comparatively  small 
compass. 

Commentators  on  this  book  may  be  divided  into 
two  great  classes.  The  first  consists  of  those  w4io 
apply  the  prophecy  to  real  events  in  the  world's  his- 
tory, extending  over  a  long  period  of  time.  These 
accept,  as  the  foundation-stone  of  their  system  of  in- 
terpretation, the  hieroglyphic  basis  that  a  day  stands 
for  a  year.  This  is  the  pole-star  of  their  interpreta- 
tion. At  the  head  of  this  School  stands  Joseph 
Mede,  who  may  be  looked  upon  as  the  first  and  great 


EELATIONS   OF   THE   SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE.  69 

apostle  of  tlie  hieroglyphic  mode  of  interpretation. 
He  has  been  succeeded  by  a  long  list  of  learned  and, 
for  the  most  part,  judicious  followers,  who,  it  may 
with  certainty  be  affirmed,  have  alone  thrown  any 
real  light  on  the  meaning  of  the  book.  These  are 
sometimes  called  historizers^  because  they  apply  the 
prophecy  to  historical  events.  The  second  class  are 
those  who  either  spiritualize  it,  or  who  apply  it  to 
events  occurring  within  a  short  space  of  time  ;  both 
of  these  latter  parties  equally  rejecting  the  hiero- 
glyphic basis  of  a  day  for  a  year  and  all  hieroglyphic 
basis  of  interpretation  w^hatever,  and  assuming  the 
figurative  and  also  the  literal  language  of  Scripture 
as  their  chief  guides  in  exposition.  It  is  only  neces- 
sary to  refer  to  the  works  of  these  last  to  recognize 
the  total  inadmissibility  of  their  principles,  if  they 
can  be  called  such.  Their  works  form  the  most  in- 
comprehensible medley,  which  perhaps  the  world  has 
ever  witnessed,  no  single  commentator  agreeing  with 
another  in  any  essential  point.  This  sacred  prophecy 
hovers  in  their  hands  between  inanity  on  the  one 
hand  and  absurdity  on  the  other.  Mr.  Moses  Stuart, 
a  man  of  a  most  accomplished  and  acute  intellect, 
has  rendered  an  interpretation,  giving  to  the  book  a 
meaning  so  jejune  and  absurd  that,  were  it  true, 
of  which  there  is  no  proof  except  that  which  lies 
in  the  fact  that  it  is  Mr.  Stuart's  conception  of  it, 
would  furnish  evidence  sufficient  to  exclude  the  Apoc- 
alypse from  the  canon  of  inspiration  altogether.  He 
regards  the  author  much  more  as  a  poet^  as  he  calls 
him,  than  as  2^  projphet ;  he  views  him  much  more  in 


70  RELATIONS    OF   THE    SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE. 

the  liglit  of  a  maJcer  than  a  messenger^  and  if  we  take 
Mr.  Stuart's  word  for  it,  his  poetry  is  sublime  and  his 
prophecy  is  ridiculous.  Mr.  Hengstenberg's  interpreta- 
tion steers  clear  of  the  absurdities  which  overload  Mr. 
Stuart's,  but  he,  on  the  other  hand,  subjects  the  book 
to  a  still,  which  effectuaHy  evaporates  meaning  from 
it  altosrether.  The  metaphoric  flowers  are  distilled 
and  an  essence  is  formed  from  them  having  none  of  the 
invigorating  qualities  of  the  "  water  of  life."  Mr. 
Lee  subjects  the  metaphorical  imagery,  as  it  is  as- 
sumed to  be,  likewise  to  a  powerful  alembic,  and 
makes  it  a  sort  of  lohite  steam^  which  hangs  over  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem.  It  must  be  acknowledged, 
however,  that  this  school,  for  the  most  part,  make  the 
book  rather  than  absurd,  inane  and  em/pty^  which  is 
equally  disastrous  to  its  claims  to  be  held  a  work  of 
divine  revelation.  How  indeed  can  a  book  have  any 
other  character,  which  is  supposed  to  be  written  al- 
most wholly  in  figurative  language  ?  It  is,  in  their 
hands,  like  the  tree  which  is  full  of  leaves  and  has  no 
fruit. 

But  it  is  often  said,  and  said  with  some  plausi- 
bility, the  first  class  of  interpreters  who  accept  the 
hieroglyj^hic  basis,  and  who  find  the  antitypes  of  the 
symbols  in  the  facts  of  history,  afibrd  such  various 
interpretations  of  the  book  as  to  cast  a  strong  sus- 
picion on  the  soundness  of  the  foundation  on  which 
they  erect  superstructures  so  transient,  so  many  and 
so  various  in  design,  as  those  whicli  they  exhibit. 
This  observation  has  an  apparent  truth  ;  nevertheless, 
in  the  great  outlines  of  interpretation  they  are  uni- 


RELATIONS   OF   THE    SYMBOLIC   LANGrAGE.  71 

versally  agreed.  This  accordance  speaks  well  for 
tlieir  principles.  But  whence,  it  may  still  be  insisted 
on,  comes  the  variety?  In  the  true  interpretation 
there  can  exist  no  variety  at  all,  and.  the  existence  of 
this  feature  is  an  evidence  that  their  interpretation  is 
not  true.  Is  ow  to  this  objection  an  answer  may 
readily  be  returned ;  two  causes  have  been  in  opera- 
tion sufficient  to  account  for  it.  These  are,  first,  that 
figurative  language  has  been  admitted  in  conjunction 
with  the  hieroglyphic  as  a  basis  of  interpretation. 
The  hieroglyphic  must  be  made  the  sole  basis ;  the 
conjunction  of  the  figurative  with  it  compromises  its 
virtue.  The  second  is,  that  the  hieroglyphic  element 
has  not  been  sufficiently  wrought  so  as  to  make  out 
the  TderoglypJdc  jplan  and  design  of  the  work.  Here 
is  the  grand  cause  of  variety  of  interpretation.  It  is 
alone  when  the  unity  of  idea  which  pervades  the 
allegory  is  apprehended,  that  one  interpretation  can 
be  put  upon  it.  It  is  this  unity  of  idea  which  stamps 
each  separate  symbol  with  a  fixed  and  demonstrative 
sense,  and  prevents  the  possibility  of  its  being  divert- 
ed from  it.  This  unity  has  hardly  been  sought  for ; 
has  certainly  not  been  found — hence  variety  of  inter- 
pretation. The  diijplication  of  the  allegory  is  another 
principle  which  the  hieroglyphic  element  yields  up, 
and  which  has  not  yet  been  used  in  interpretation. 
It  is  only  second  to  the  above  in  restraining  variety 
of  interpretation  and  affixing  one  demonstrative  sense 
to  the  prophecy.  The  prophetic  allegory,  according 
to  a  fundamental  law  of  its  constitution,  which  will 
be  pointed  out,  is  one  in  subject  and  twofold  in  repre- 


72  RELATIONS   OF   THE   SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE. 

sentation.  The  two  yersions  are  therefore  indices 
and  correctives  of  each  other.  These  important  prin- 
ciples having  been  unapplied,  it  cannot  be  said  with 
justice  that  the  hieroglyphic  basis  has  as  yet  been 
properly  laid. 

Unquestionably,  then,  the  great  pest  of  a  right  in- 
terpretation of  the  Kevelation,  has  hitherto  been  the 
non-recognition  of  the  essential  difference  between 
symbol  and  figure^  and  the  ajDplication  to  it  of  figu- 
rative language  as  an  exponent  of  its  meaning. 
This  is  an  evil  influence  under  which  all  interpreters 
of  the  book  have  more  or  less  labored.  This  has 
been  disastrous  in  two  respects. 

It  has  first  of  all  loosened  the  fixed  senses  of  the 
symbols,  by  bringing  the  signs  of  another  language 
to  expound  them.  This  is  a  serious  evil.  It  is  an 
evil  which  involves  a  principle  of  interpretation  as 
absurd  as  it  is  ruinous.  Who  would  think  of  turning 
up  a  German  Lexicon  to  ascertain  the  sense  of  a 
Greek  word  ?  The  natural  relationship  of  languages 
might  lend  some  small  aid  to  the  investigator  who 
took  this  strange  route,  but  undoubtedly  the  German 
Lexicon  would  afford  an  insecure  basis  for  the  sense 
of  the  Greek  term.  Why,  then,  has  recourse  been  had 
to  a  process  so  unsatisfactory  in  the  intepretation  of 
the  Eevelation  ?  Such  a  mode  being  followed,  is  it 
at  all  wonderful  that  interpretation  has  failed  ?  The 
symbolic  language  is  certainly  as  different  from  literal 
as  Greek  is  from  German,  and  there  is  at  least  as 
wide  a  difference  between  figurative  and  the  sym- 
bolic, as  there  is  between  one  dialect  of  a  spoken 


EELATIONS   OF   THE   SYI^rBOLIG    LANGUAGE.  73 

tongue  than  another.  Surely  no  one  will  deny  that 
tliere  does  exist  a  fundamental  distinction  between 
figure  and  allegory ;  that  though  they  are  both  ideo- 
graphic signs,  they  are  essentially  different ;  that  the 
one  is  an  ojyen  and  the  other  is  a  shut  sign  ;  that  the 
language  constituted  by  the  one  class  of  signs  pos- 
sesses no  organization,  as  a  language,  distinct  from 
literal,  and  that  that  which  the  other  forms  has  such 
an  organization.  A  figure,  then,  has  nothing  whatever 
to  do  in  fixing  the  sense  of  a  sign  in  another  lan- 
guage. 

As  long  as  such  a  course  is  pursued,  it  may  with 
certainty  be  afi&rmed,  that  there  never  will  be  any 
sound  interpretation  of  the  Revelation  rendered. 
The  figurative  writings  of  Scripture  must  be  resigned 
as  a  basis  of  interpretation  altogether.  In  a  subordi- 
nate capacity  they  may  be  employed,  just  as  the 
literal  parts  of  Scripture  may  be  used,  since  the  Bible 
is  all  the  effluence  of  one  Divine  Mind,  and  is  per- 
vaded by  one  design.  But  as  a  preliminary,  and  pre- 
dominant to  any  application  of  these,  the  grand  out- 
lines of  the  sense  must  be  fixed  by  hieroglyphic  laws 
and  the  senses  of  the  symbols.  When  figurative  lan- 
guage appears  as  the  exponent  of  an  allegory,  and 
appears  w4th  authority,  it  comes  only  with  the  sword 
of  the  invader  and  the  claim  of  the  usurper.  Its 
sceptre  is  the  symbol  of  universal  anarchy.  It  can 
only  lend  any  real  aid  to  the  interpretation  as  an 
auxiliary  entirely  subordinate — as  a  servant,  and  not 
as  a  master  ;  it  may  always  be  cited  in  evidence  as  a 
confirmatory  witness  of  the  true  sense,  but  it  can 
4 


Y4:  EELATIONS   OF  THE   SY:ME0LIC   LANGUAGE. 

never  be  a|)pealed  to  as  a  judge.  Its  testimony  is 
valuable  when  it  is  in  unison  with  that  of  the  liiero- 
glyphic  sense.  It  is  an  ideographic  sign ;  as  such  it 
has  something  germane  in  it  to  the  nature  of  the 
allegory.  But  its  signification  is  so  little  fixed  and 
definite,  on  the  contrary,  so  shifting  and  various,  that 
as  a  basis  of  interpretation,  it  must  be  in  the  last  de- 
gree treacherous.  A  well-chosen  and  well-shapen  met- 
aphor is  at  all  times  a  sign  beautiful,  impressive,  and 
forcible  ;  none  will  dispute  its  significance  and  value ; 
but  it  is  a  sign  purely  ephemeral ;  its  existence  ter- 
minates with  the  occasion  for  which  it  has  been  used. 
It  is  clear  and  even  brilliant  in  the  context  in  which 
it  stands,  fresh  and  glistering  like 'the  tree-leaf  wet 
with  dew  and  quivering  in  the  sun  and  breeze. 
When  extracted  from  the  context  and  when  it  is 
made  the  exponent  of  a  hieroglyph,  it  is  like  the  same 
leaf  plucked  from  the  parent  stem — it  is  a  dead  and 
%cithered  thing.  Its  analysis  may  throw  some  light 
on  the  genus  of  the  hieroglyph,  but  none  whatever  on 
its   individuality. 

But  a  second  evil,  perhaps  a  greater,  has  resulted 
from  the  course  which  has  been  followed.  By  pros- 
ecuting figurative  language,  the  attention  of  inter- 
preters has  been  diverted  from  that  field  of  inquiry — 
hieroglyphic  or  symbolic  composition — where  alone 
satisfactory  results  are  to  be  reaped.  The  laws  of  this 
species  of  writing  have  not  been  studied.  Commen- 
tators, pursuing  figures  and  metaphors,  through  all 
the  thousand  resemblances  which  they  disclose,  with 
events  supposed  to  be  foreshadowed — metaphors  ne- 


RELATIONS   OF  THE  ST:M330LIC  LANGUAGE.  75 

cessarily  liglit  in  substance  and  at  the  mercy  of  every 
Avind,  have  spent  tlieir  breath  in  vain.  They  have 
followed  phantoms  and  obtained  no  result ;  we  mean 
no  result  from  this  pursuit ;  but  an  evil  more  to  be 
deplored  than  this  merely  idle  sport,  or,  to  give  it  a 
less  opprobrious  and  a  more  dignified  name,  this 
sacred  game  ;  they  have  neglected  that  really  valuable 
standing  corn  and  grain  which  waits  only  the  sickle 
to  be  thrust  into  it  to  be  reaped,  and  which,  now  that 
the  prophecy  is  fulfilled,  is  ripe  for  the  harvest.  Their 
labors,  by  having  been  misdirected,  have  been  wasted 
and  frittered  away.  The  prophecy  itself  has  been 
undervalued,  and  \hQ  good  which  it  is  calculated  to 
yield  has  not  been  obtained.  Its  interpretation  has 
been  reduced  to  a  species  of  contempt,  bordering  on 
a  bye- word  and  a  proverb,  and  there  are  some  who 
are  even  audacious  enough  to  affirm,  that  the  work 
of  the  Divine  Mind  is  deficient  in  intelligence.  Why 
is  this  ?  We  have  already  pointed  out  causes  suffi- 
cient to  account  for  the  failure  of  its  interpretation. 
•The  hieroglyphic  language  which  conveys  the  proph- 
ecy, its  laws  and  its  signs  have  not  been  studied,  nor 
in  the  interpretation  has  it  been  exclusively  had  re- 
course to.  It  has  been  mixed  with  foreign  elements 
which  tend  to  neutralize  its  power.  Here,  in  this  hie- 
roglyphic language,  in  its  laws  and  government,  there 
is  alone  the  mine  wdiich  contains  the  golden  ore  of 
prophetic  truth  in  this  case.  This  mine  has  still  to 
be  worked,  for  the  earth  has  hardly  been  scraped 
from  oflf  it.  Here  is  to  be  found  the  metal  in  which 
the  everlasting  types  of  the  Eevelation  are  cast.     The 


76  EELATIONS   OF   THE   SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE. 

revelations  of  this  book  are  not  conveyed  in  flowery 
figure  or  fragile  metaj)lior,  the  very  profusion  and 
splendor  of  which,  as  they  fill  its  pages,  did  its 
language  consist  of  these  and  not  something  better, 
w^ould  conclusively  prove  the  vanity  and  emptiness 
of  its  contents.  Its  prophetic  communications  are 
made  in  signs  of  a  very  difi'erent  nature — signs  that 
are  mystic  but  fraught  with  a  deep  intelligence,  that 
are  dark  but  which  centuries  make  more  clear.  Its 
communications  are  written  with  ''  a  pen  of  iron  and 
with  lead  in  the  rock  for  ever."  It  is  necessary  to 
study  this  iro7i  writing^  to  know  its  cryptogrammic, 
its  apparently  uncouth  but  yet  beautifully  distinct, 
its  mystic  but  yet  definite  signs,  forming  that  won- 
drous vehicle  of  divine  prophecy  which  conceals  and 
discloses  its  meaning  ;  which  hides  it  now  but  reveals 
it  wdien  the  suns  of  centuries  have  rolled  away,  and 
the  things  which  it  foretold  have  been  finished. 
Yerily  this  is  no  metaplioric  tongue  which  is  suit- 
able for  present  use.  This  is  the  deep-mouthed 
tongue  of  future  ages — it  speaks  to-day  but  it  is  heard 
to-inorvow — its  articulations  roll  over  centuries,  and 
these  echo  them  back — it  is  mystic,  profound,  sublime 
— it  is  difi'erent  from  all  other  tongues.  It  is  the 
tongue  of  Symbolic  Prophecy,  that  messenger  of  the 
divinity^  that  shoots  ahead  of  Time  with  her  roll 
closed,  returns,  and  flies  alongside  of  him  with  her 
roll  extended. 

Mr.  Stuart's  basis  of  interpretation  may  be  learned  from  the 
following  passage  which  occurs  in  the  preface  to  his  Commentary. 


KELATIONS   OF  THE   SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE.  T7 

He  says  :  "  I  take  it  for  granted,  that  the  writer  had  a  present 
and  iminediate  object  in  view  when  he  wrote  the  book ;  and,  of 
course,  I  must  regard  him  as  having  spoken  intelHgibly  to  those 
whom  he  addressed." 

To  the  'postulate^  contained  in  this  astounding  statement,  Mr. 
Stuart  makes  frequent  appeal  in  the  course  of  his  Commentary, 
and  grounds  his  main  argument  upon  it.  Yet  Mr.  Stuart's  prin- 
ciple of  interpretation  is  a  milch  greater  mystery  than  the  book 
it  assumes  to  interpret.  For  here  is  a  book  addressed  to  seven 
populous  churches,  which  was  quite  intelligible  to  them,  but  the 
meaning  of  which  was  buried  in  their  graves.  The  writers  in  the 
first  ages  of  Christianity,  not  only  knew  nothing  of  the  meaning, 
but  they  were  not  even  aware  of  the  fact,  that  it  had  ever  been 
intelhgible.  Irenseus,  who  enjoyed  the  friendship  of  Polycarp, 
who  was  a  disciple  of  the  prophet  himself,  not  only  had  no  trace 
of  this  meaning,  but  he  had  never  heard  that  it  had  been  once  in- 
telligible. He,  and  all  who  write  upon  it  ia  the  early  ages  of 
Christianity,  evidently  regard  it  as  having  ever  been  a  most  mys- 
terious book.  Yet,  according  to  Mr.  Stuart,  its  meaning  was  well 
known  to  the  seven  churches  of  Asia.  Here  is  a  mystery  which, 
were  it  a  fact,  might  rank  among  the  most  extraordinary  of  mira- 
cles. The  seven  churches  must  have  had  a  power  of  secrecy  such 
as  never  was  possessed  before  or  since  their  time.  But  why  were 
they  bound  to  this  secrecy,  for  they  must  be  conceived  as  having 
been  bound  to  it,  and  admitting  that  they  kept  the  secret  with 
the  inviolability  due  to  an  oath,  how  is  it  to  be  accounted  for,  that 
the  fact  itself  of  their  being  in  possession  of  it,  did  not  ooze  out 
to  the  other  churches,  and  thus  trickle  down  the  stream  of  time  ? 
These  are  mysteries  which  form  the  Ijasis  of  Mr.  Stuart's  interpre- 
tation, and  they  are  mysteries  much  more  inexplicable  than  any 
which  the  book  contains.  It  contains,  let  it  be  admitted,  myste- 
rious signs^  but  here  is  a  mysterious  fact^  or  at  least  a  supposed 
fact,  made,  too,  a  basis  of  interpretation,  of  which  fact  the  mys- 
tery is  so  intense,  that  its  existence  may  be  fairly  questioned.  Of 
course  Mr.  Stuart's  interpretation,  which  rests  upon  this  assumed 
fact,  falls  with, it.     His  commentary  is  nevertheless  valuable  for 


78  RELATIONS   OF   THE    SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE. 

the  great  learning  and  acute  discrimination,  within  a  certain  ra- 
dius, which  it  displays.  He  makes  no  distinction  between  sym- 
bolic and  figurative  language,  except  in  regard  to  style.  On  this 
subject  he  has  the  following  remarks  : 

'•'  Among  all  the  earlier  prophetic  annunciations  respecting  the 
future  kingdom  of  heaven,  however,  none  are  to  be  found  where 
symbol  is  employed  in  the  manner  in  which  Ezekiel,  Daniel,  Zech- 
ariah,  and  the  author  of  the  Apocalypse  employ  it.  Figurative 
language  is,  indeed,  everywhere  employed.  From  the  very  nature 
of  the  case,  this  was  absolutely  necessary ;  for  how  could  an  at- 
tractive picture  of  things  in  the  distant  future  be  drawn,  without 
borrowing  the  costume  of  the  age  in  which  the  prophetic  author 
wrote  ?  How  could  he  form  a  picture  both  animated  and  strik- 
ing, unless  he  addressed  the  imagination  and  fancy  through  the 
medium  of  imagery  or  tropical  language  ?  The  2d  Psalm,  the 
45th  Psalm,  and  most  of  the  predictions  in  Isaiah,  are  notable 
examples  of  what  I  here  mean  to  designate.  No  part  of  the  Scrip- 
tures is  more  full  of  trope  and  imagery  than  these  Messianic  com- 
positions ;  none  requires  more  rhetorical  discrimination  and  taste, 
in  order  to  make  a  correct  interpretation. 

'•  But  with  all  this  abundance  of  metaphor  and  animated  im- 
agery, how  diiiferent  still  is  the  manner  of  these  predictions,  from 
the  general  tenor  of  those  contained  in  the  book  of  Ezekiel, 
Daniel,  and  Zechariah  !  I  do  not  now  speak  merely  of  the  Mes- 
sianic predictions  in  these  books,  but  of  the  general  manner  of  the 
entire  compositions  of  these  prophets.  From  the  time  of  the  cap- 
tivity downwards,  the  taste  of  the  Hebrew  writers  in  general 
seems  to  have  undergone  a  great  change.  I  know  of  nothing 
more  dissimilar  in  respect  to  style  and  method,  than  Isaiah,  for 
example,  on  the  one  side,  and  Ezekiel,  Daniel,  Zechariah,  Ilaggai, 
and  Malachi,  on  the  other.  Jeremiah  is  an  example  of  a  kind  of 
intermediate  tone  between  the  two.  But  he  was  educated  in 
Palestine,  and  spent  most  of  his  life  there.  His  style  exhibits 
some  points  of  surpassing  excellence,  in  regard  to  which  he  has 
not  been  outdone  by  any  writer,  perhaps  never  equalled.  But  his 
writings  afford  us  only  a  few  examples  of  the  symbolic  method  of 


KELATIONS   OF  THE   SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE. 


79 


representation;    such  as  those  of  the  linen  g,rdlc,  eh- xn..,    he 
Ztcr  and  his  barred  work,  ch.  xviii. ;  the  potter's  earthen  bottle 
ch  Kix  ;    the  two  baskets  of  figs,  ch.  xxiv. ;  and  the  bond^  and 
yoke  pu    on  his  neck,  ch.  xxvii.    In  Isaiah,  I  find  but  a  smgle  m- 
ttce  o    a  similar  nature  ;  (unless  indeed  .-e  add  to  th.s  the  rep- 
"n  ation  in  eh.  viii.)    This  is  in  ch.  xx.,  ^here  the  prophet  . 
commanded  "to  ^alk  naked  and  barefoot  for  the  space  of  three 
3"    I  do  not  understand  this,  however,  as  any  thmg  more 
than  an  emUcmatic  picture  exhibited  indeed  in  language,  but  not 
My     n-ied  through  in  action.     Still,  in  its  nature  U.s  sym- 
bo  ic      In  the  sa,ne  manner  I  understand  the  symbohc  transac- 
tion exhibited  in  Hosea  i.  ii.    Amos  has  one  example  of  symbol 
also  in  chap,  viii-,  viz.,  a  basket  of  summer  frmt. 

"rettheread;r  pass  now  from  an  attentive  exammat.on  of 
the^e  early  prophets,  to  the  careful  perusal  of  those  who  wrote 
durin  '  nd  aft'er  the  Babylonish  exile.  Ezekiel  from  begmmng 
to  end,  is  almost  an  unbroken  series  of  symbohcal  representation. 
Hi!  poaching  or  prophesying  stands,  in  almost  every  case,  con- 
nected intimately  with  representations  of  such  a  nature 

"  The  book  of  Daniel  is,  if  we  except  a  little  of  .t  which  is  oc 
cupied  with  historic  narrative,  nothing  Ut  .y,nlol  from  begmn  ng 
to  end.    Dreams,  visions,  sensible  representations,  m  which  that 
:  acted  out,  in  'view  of  the  prophet  which  he  is  to  recor'i  -  a 
prediction,  constitute  the  whole  of  his  prophecies.    In  these  re 
speets    he  is  the  exemplar  of  the  Apocalypse,  whose  author  al- 
lugh  indeed  no  imitator  in  a  servile  sense  of  any  other  wr^e 
would  seem  still  to  have  given  a  decided  preference  to  Daniel  s 
method  of  representation  above  that  of  other  prophets. 

"The  book  of  Zechariah,  again,  is  one  continuous  strain  of 
symbols,  until  we  reach  ch.  vii. ;  this,  with  ch.  viii.,  resembles 
very  much  the  manner  of  Haggai  and  Malachi,  his  contemporaries 
"Here  then  are  plain  and  palpable /««te before  us.  A  great 
change  took  place  in  the  prophetic  style  and  method,  from  ami 
after  the  date  of  the  Jewish  captivity.  Jeremiah  presents  th  » 
matter  to  us,  in  its  transition-state;  which  is  what  we  might 
naturally  expect.    Ezekiel,  who  is  carried  into  a  foreign  country 


80  RELATIONS  OF  THE  SYMBOLIC   LANGUAGE. 

when  young,  fully  adopts  the  method  of  the  prophets  during  and 
after  the  exile.  The  taste  for  this  mode  of  writing,  introduced 
by  such  men  as  Ezekiel,  Daniel,  and  Zechariah,  seems  to  have 
been  widely  diffused  among  the  Jews  everywhere,  and  to  have 
come  down,  with  augmented  sway,  to  the  apostolic  age  and  the 
times  which  immediately  succeeded  it." 

These  observations,  and  some  others  of  a  similar  kind,  by  no 
means  exhaust  the  subject,  and  give  a  view  of  prophecy  which 
is  scarcely  compatible  with  any  rational  conception  of  its  inspi- 
ration. 


CHAPTEK  YI. 

DEFIXITEXES3  OF  THE  SEXSE  OF  THE  PEOPHETIC  ALLEGOKY. 

OuK  object  lias  been  hitherto  to  show  that  the 
hieroglyphic  language  in  whicli  the  Ee^'ehition  is 
couched  is  a  distinct  language  ;  is  a  language  within 
itself;  can  only  be  interpreted  by  itself,  and  that 
nothing  but  confusion  can  arise  from  explications 
draAvn  from  that  which  is  another  and  a  different 
language. 

It  has  been  our  object  to  contrast  it  with  figura- 
tive language,  and  to  show  that  while  this  is  clear^  it 
is  clarlt.  To  exhibit  this  essentially  dark  quality  of  it 
may  be  thought  to  have  been  a  supererogatory  task, 
since  the  Kevelation  which  is  composed  in  it  is  still 
obscure,  after  the  lapse  of  eighteen  centuries.  But 
what  is  the  main  reason  of  this  ?  '^hy?  that  the  at- 
tempt, which  must  be  vain,  has  been  made  to  illumi- 
nate it  by  submitting  it  to  the  effects  of  a  clear  lan- 
guage, whicli  is,  however,  another;  the  result  has 
been,  that  its  darkness  has  been  rendered  more  intense, 
and  made  more  profound.  It  is  possible  to  strike 
sparks  of  fire  by  bringing  two  hard  bodies  into  con- 
tact ;  but  the  eflect  will  hardly  be  produced  if  the  ex- 
4* 


82  DEFINITENESS   OF  THE  ALLEGOEY. 

periment  be  tried  between  a  bard  and  a  soft  body. 
It  is  as  rational  to  expect  tbat  a  clear  language  will 
explicate  a  dark.  This  cryptogrammic  language  then 
ought  to  be  its  own  interpreter.  By  assiduous  labor 
it  may  be  made  to  yield  sparks  of  fire,  and  it  cajanot  be 
questioned  that  the  light  which  has  as  yet  emanated 
from  the  hieroglyphic  language  has  arisen  from  scin- 
tillations struck  from  itself. 

But  this  language,  though  at  first  dark,  contains 
within  itself  the  elements  of  light ;  it  is  designed  after- 
wards  to  he  clear ^  and  for  this  object  it  is  constructed 
with  precision  and  armed  with  definiteness. 

We  have  already  considered  two  23rinciples  wdiich 
tend  to  give  it  this  definite  power.  The  first  of  these 
is  the  unity  of  the  allegory. 

We  have  also  alluded  already  to  two  other  most 
important  features  of  the  prophetic  allegory,  as  it  is 
developed  in  Scripture,  which  tend  in  no  small  degree 
to  extract  the  real  sense  from  the  obscurity  of  enigma, 
and  to  confirm  it  with  demonstrative  power  when  it 
is  eliminated.  These  are,  on  the  one  hand,  tlie  du- 
plication of  the  allegory,  and,  on  the  other,  that  nota- 
ble feature  of  it  which  consists  in  its  structure  with 
four  subjects  in  it^  forming  nevertheless  a  unity  in 
the  group.  The  first  of  these,  the  double  version,  has 
the  same  effect  in  clearing  and  confirming  the  sense, 
which  two  copies,  in  different  tongues,  of  one  and 
the  same  document  expressed  in  literal  language 
necessarily  exert  on  the  interpretation  of  the  sense, 
however  dark  and  obscure,  however  involved  and 
perplexed  the  phraseology  of  either  tongue  may  be. 


DEFmiTENESS    OF   THE    ALLEGOEY.  83 

It  is  obvious  that  tlie  comparison  instituted  between 
the  two  copies  of  the  document,  necessarily  possesses 
a  signal  effect  in  explicating  the  meaning.  The 
other  principle,  that  of  the  quaternal  structure  of  the 
allegory,  has  the  virtue  of  arranging  and  simplifying 
the  materials  of  it  and  reducing  these  to  order,  sym- 
metry and  system.  In  a  long  allegory,  such  as  the 
Kevelation,  it  is  evident  that  it  is  a  principle  in  the 
highest  degree  efficacious  to  this  end  and  to  the  expli- 
cation of  the  sense. 

These  four  grand  principles  of  explication,  which 
the  prophetic  allegory  as  developed  in  Scripture  con- 
tains within  itself,  may  justly  be  held  sufficient  to 
•solve  its  enigma,  however  obstinate  this  may  be,  and 
to  invest  the  meaning  which  the  solution  gives  with 
demonstrative  power.  The  very  obstinacy  and  diffi- 
culty of  interpretation  become  thus  the  guarantee  of 
the  true  meaning.  Literal  prophecy  is  easily  under- 
stood, when  the  words  in  which  it  is  expressed  are  un- 
derstood, for  this  possesses  no  demonstrative  power. 
Symbolic  i)i'opliecy  is  difficult  of  interpretation  for 
the  very  reason  that  it  possesses  a  demonstrative 
power  which  approaches  the  mathematical.  Its  sense 
is  enclosed  and  fortified  by  a  fourfold  wall,  which  re- 
quires to  be  stormed  ere  the  town  which  they  enclose 
can  be  taken.  But  the  town  which  these  walls  fortify 
is  a  valuable  stronghold  of  the  truth  which  is  at  pres- 
ent in  the  hands  of  the  enemy,  and  which  must  be 
taken. 

.  Prophecy   delivered   in   literal   language   is    ex- 
tremely precise.     Prophecy  delivered   in  figurative 


84:  DEFINITENESS   OF  THE   ALLEGORY. 

language  is  also  precise  in  its  announcements,  pro- 
vided the  line  of  demarcation  be  truly  drawn  between 
what  is  really  figurative  and  what  is  literal.  Pro- 
phecy delivered  in  symbol,  while  it  is  much  more 
general  in  its  announcements  than  that  which  is  ex- 
pressed in  literal  language,  has  a  sense  more  fixed 
and  definite.  A  prophetic  allegory  is  a  scientific 
structure ;  the  parallelisms  between  the  imagery  and 
the  events  it  predicts,  especially  if  it  be  long  and 
complex,  may  be  reduced  to  a  species  of  mathemati- 
cal demonstration.  While  it  is  incapable  of  yielding 
the  minuteness  and  precision,  it  may  thus  be  justly 
held  to  render  a  sense  more  fixed,  definite,  than  even 
literal  language.  This  is  incapable  of  any  kind  of 
demonstrative  proof.  It  rests  on  the  mere  usus  lo- 
quendi^  which  is  always  liable  to  change ;  and  thus 
its  sense  may  undergo  a  revolution  by  the  corruption 
of  a  word  or  by  the  faulty  transcription  of  a  single 
letter.  Prophetic  allegory  on  the  other  hand,  is  inde- 
pendent of  any  such  contingencies  ;  and  when  once 
written  it  may  be  regarded  as  imperishable.  The 
mutation  of  a  letter,  or  even  of  a  word,  cannot  se- 
riously afi'ect  it;  because  it  is  written  not  in  mere 
words,  but  in  the  living  characters  of  idea  and  of 
thought^  which  are  eternal.  It  lives  then  equally 
through  the  fall  of  empires  and  of  tongues,  and  it  is 
after  the  lapse  of  thousands  of  ages,  as  long  indeed 
as  the  objects  which  are  its  signs  and  the  intellect 
itself  endure,  capable  of  the  same  mathematical  de- 
monstration as  on  the  day  when  its  sense  was  proved 
by  its  fulfilment.     Its  sense  is  inherent  in  it,  although 


DEFINITENESS    OF   THE   ALLEGORY.  85 

it  may  have  been  TTnkno^Yn  to  the  prophet  himself 
who  penned  it,  and  although  the  ages  that  imme- 
diately followed  him  may  not  have  discovered  it.  It 
is  destined  one  day  to  spring  forth  like  the  morning 
light  from  the  night  of  darkness,  in  which  it  has  en- 
veloped itself,  and  to  shine  with  the  lustre  of  the  full- 
orbed  day — at  a  time  when  no  suspicion  can  be  cast 
on  the  purity  of  its  testimony.  It  waits  wi'h  pa- 
tience till  this  moment  has  arrived ;  it  appears  in  its 
robe  of  light,  when  the  events  which  it  foretold  have 
rolled  away  into  the  past,  and  it  proclaims  with  a 
living  voice,  ''  I  predicted  these  ;  read  the  revelation 
which  I  made,  it  is  clear  and  intelligible."  Every 
sound  understanding  must  admit  that  it  is  this  ;  while 
the  tongue  of  the  infidel  is  forever  sealed  in  silence, 
who  would  reply,  "  these  predictions  produced  them- 
selves, and  they  wrought  out  their  own  accomplish- 
ment." This  they  could  not  have  done,  for  they  have 
not  been  understood.  Its  disguise  is  thus  as  wise  as 
its  revelations  are  miraculous.  It  is  in  virtue  of  its 
concealed  definiteness  alone  that  symbolic  prophecy 
becomes,  when  it  ceases  to  be  a  prophet,  an  everlast- 
ing and  ^miinpeachahle  witness^  the  truth  of  whose 
testimony  the  metaphysical  power  of  no  Hume  may 
impugn,  nor  the  wit  of  any  Voltaire  strike,  and  which 
time  cannot  sensibly  impair.  And  this  testimony, 
which  enshrines  a  miracle  within  it — a  miracle  that  is 
endowed  with  a  youngness  liable  neither  to  taint  nor 
to  age,  is  delivered  in  a  universal  language,  which 
is  elevated  above  the  strife  and  the  vicissitudes  of 
human  tongues,  for  its  signs  are  not  words  but  ideas^ 


86  DEFESriTENESS    OF   THE   ALLEGORY. 

adapted  to  all  times  and  suitable  for  all  nations, 
whether  these  be  garnished  with  the  spoils  of  intel- 
lect and  civilization,  or  whether  they  be  merely  scrap- 
ing a  scant  existence  on  the  outskirts  of  the  world. 
These  features  of  allegorical  composition  fill  the  mind 
with  high  cnnceptions  at  once  of  the  intrinsic  worth 
and  the  sublimity  of  it.  At  the  same  time  they  attest 
the  wisdom  of  that  'divine  mind  that  selected  this 
imperishable  vehicle  to  convey  to  humanity  at  once 
the  undying  lessons  of  a  pure  and  holy  morality,  cal- 
culated to  guide  it  for  ever  on  the  way  of  truth,  and 
the  roll  of  prophecy,  which  supplies  these  with  the 
miimpeachable  warrant  of  insj)iration. 

While  the  demonstrative  power  which  symbolic 
composition  possesses,  yields  definiteness  and  fixity  to 
tlie  sense,  the  organized  language  which  it  possesses 
gives  it,  to  a  great  extent,  ^:>r^m2(9?i.  The  formation 
of  its  hieroglyphic  signs  into  a  regularly  organized 
language,  supplies  it  to  a  great  extent  with  that  quality 
of  precision  which  the  signs  of  literal  language  pos- 
sess. The  signs  which  it  has,  form,  in  truth,  nothing 
less  than  a  literal  language  in  ci]?he7\  At  the  same 
time  the  signs  being  in  their  nature  ideographic,  and 
in  consequence  germane  to  the  allegory  itself,  are 
capable  of  combining  and  assimilating  with  it  to  an 
extent  that  gives  it  a  surprising  j^liancy  and  flexibility. 
An  allegory,  the  signs  of  which  derive  their  whole 
significance  from  itself,  is  caj^able  of  delivering  moral 
and  8j)iritual  lessons  w^ith  suflicient  exactitude  of  ex- 
pression. But  such  an  allegory,  it  is  plain,  could  only 
convey  an  impression  oi  facts ^  general  in  the  highest 


DEFINITENESS   OF  THE  ALLEGORY.  87 

degree.  An  allegory,  however,  wliicli  is  composed 
in  signs  regularly  organized  and  disciplined  into  a 
language,  possesses  a  tenfold  precision  and  definite- 
ness.  The  hieroglyphical  material  is  by  this  expedient 
rendered  soft  and  pliant,  and  capable  of  affording  an 
impression  of  bare  facts.  It  can  make  revelations  of 
future  events  with  comparative  distinctness.  An 
element  of  literality  is  superadded  to  it,  for  each  of 
these  signs  has  a  sense  absolutely  definite  as  much  as 
a  word  in  language  literally  taken.  The  basis  on 
which  their  signification  rests  is  not  analogy,  but 
identity.  They  do  not  represent  certain  things  be- 
cause they  are  like  these,  (although  tlie  analogy  may 
be  held  as  the  foundation  of  the  sense,)  but  because 
it  is  OjTlntrarily  fixed  that  they  should  represent  them. 
Thus  a  "beast,"  a  "  mountain,"  "a wind,"  the  "sun," 
just  as  much  stand  for  a  dominion  as  the  words  in 
literal  language  "kingdom,"  "dominion,"  "state,"  or 
"  empire."  If  any  one  doubts  this  let  him  consult 
the  interpretations  of  the  prophets  which  constitute  a 
lexicon  of  these  hieroglyphics.  He  wall  find  the 
value  of  every  principal  sign  recorded  there  with  pre- 
cision, while  from  the  principal  signs  the  sense  of  the 
subordinate  *Is  naturally  and  necessarily  to  be  de- 
duced. The  main  object  accomplished  by  this  or- 
ganization of  the  hieroglyphics  into  a  language  is,  that 
the  prophecy  which  is  couched  in  them  has  increased 
definiteness  as  well  as  increased  precision.  It  still 
wants  the  concise  and  close  exactitude  of  literal  lan- 
guage, its  laconic  brevity  and  searching  precision. 
In  place  of  these,  however,  it  has  in  a  higher  degree 


88  DEFINITENESS   OF  THE  ALLEGOET. 

another  quality  wliicli  is  even  more  valuable.  It  has 
a  certainty  of  sense  superior  to  that  which  the  other 
possesses.  The  certainty  of  a  symbolic  prophecy 
is  the  result  not  alone  of  precedent  and  established 
custom,  which  are  good  guarantees  in  all  cases  of  the 
meaning,  and  on  which  the  intimations  of  literal  lan- 
guage rest  w^ith  perfect  security  :  it  has  this  guaran- 
tee, also,  but  it  is  not  its  chief  one.  The  basis  of  its 
certainty  is,  that  sure  rock  of  demonstrative  reasoning 
wdiich  mathematical  truth  selects  as  the  foundation 
on  which  she  builds  those  impregnable  problems  of 
hers  that  can  afford  equally  to  laugh  at  scej)ticism 
and  to  contemn  sophistry.  It  is  on  this  rock,  too, 
that  symbolic  prophecy  builds  her  revelations  which, 
although  problematic,  are  true. 

The  fact  that  a  mathematical  problem  is  dark  and 
incomprehensible,  throws  not  the  slightest  imputation 
on  its  truth  and  certainty.  The  Principia  of  Newton 
are  dark  in  the  estimation  of  most  minds,  because 
they  are  not  understood ;  yet  they  contain  truths  that 
are  certain.  The  Revelation  then  may  be  dark  and 
yet  its  meaning  may  be  certain ;  and  it  must  be 
this,  else  it  contained  not  a  Divine  revelation.  Does 
it,  then,  like  the  Principia  of  the  phildfeopher,  take  a 
master  mind  to  fathom  it,  and  is  it  to  such  alone 
clear,  and  its  sense  to  such  alone  certain  ?  By  no 
means ;  it  has  doubtless  been  designed  by  its  Divine 
and  beneficent  author  for  the  poor  as  well  as  the  rich 
in  mental  wealth,  for  the  child  as  well  as  the  man  in 
wisdom.  Nay,  its  essentially  pictorial  character 
shows  its  final  destiny  to  be  that  of  extreme  simplicity 


DEFINITENESS   OF  THE   ALLEGORY. 


89 


and  perspicuoiisness.     Its  darkness  hitherto,  arises  not 
at   all   from  any  inherent  incapacity  of  the  human 
mind  to  understand  it,  but  simply  from  the  fact  that 
the  certainty  and  clearness  of  its  sense  have  been  de- 
pendent on  causes  not  in  operation ;  its  certainty  and 
clearness,  arise  from  causes  which  it  has  taken  cen- 
turies to  evolve  and  bring  into  action.     Such  are  the 
principles  of  its  interpretation,  which  for  centuries 
have  not  been  discovered,  the  plan  of  its  structui-e, 
which  has  not  been  known,  and  above  all,  the  fulfil- 
ment  of  its  predictions  ;   the  fact   that  its  realities 
were  unknown,  has  above  all  invested  it  with  ob- 
scurity.   The  causes,  then,  which  ultimately  yield  to 
it  certainty  of  sense  and  perspicuousness  of  expression 
subserve,  by  their  hitherto  non-action,  the  design^  of 
God  who  evidently  framed  it  by  his  Spirit,  to  be  first 
a  darlc,  and  afterwards  a  dear  revelation.     Herem  is 
the  Divine  wisdom  magnified,  who  has  constructed  a 
revelation    designed  to  proclaim    to    all    time    the 
agency,  but  not  to  obstruct  the  course  of  his  provi- 

dence. 

This  power  of  demonstrating  its  own  meaning, 
which  an  allegoric  prophecy  contains  within  itself, 
arises  from  the  combination  of  the  three  following 
elements  in  it ; 

1st.  The  known  general  senses  of  its  hieroglyphic 
signs,  as  ascertained  by  interpretations  rendered  in 
Scripture. 

'Id.  The  \\\o^YXi  particidar  senses  of  these,  as  fixed 
by  the  unity  of  design  which  pervades  and  the  du- 
plication which  is  made  of  the  allegory. 


90  DEFINITENESS    OF   THE   AELEGOKY. 

Sd.  The  correspondence  between  the  significa- 
tions of  the  signs  thus  absolutely  fixed  and  the  known 
realities  which  the  allegory  foreshadows,  that  is,  the 
events  w^hicli  it  j^redicts. 

When  the  conditions  represented  by  these  three 
elements  are  fulfilled,  the  result  is  a  demonstration 
of  the  highest  order,  and  evidently  such  as  inspiration 
alone  can  afiford,  for  it  is  a  ])ro])liecy  with  sense  de- 
Quonstrated. 

It  is  to  be  observed  that  in  the  fulfilment  of  the 
above  conditions  there  are  two  separate  and  distinct 
demonstrations  of  the  sense.  The  sense  is  demon- 
strated first  of  all  by  the  correspondence  which  is 
proved  to  subsist  between  the  significations  of  the 
signs,  determined  by  interpretations  rendered  in 
Scripture,  and  the  significations  of  these  fixed  by  the 
allegory's  unity  of  conception  and  design,  the  sense 
being  farther  checked  by  the  reduplication  of  the 
allegory,  as  also,  it  may  be  added,  by  the  exhibition 
twice  over  of  its  quaternary.  This  is  one  demonstra- 
tion, and  it  is  amply  sufiicient  to  establish  the  sense. 
In  the  above  elements  there  is  room  for  the  evolution 
of  a  complicated  design  in  plot  and  structure,  which 
is  much  more  than  sufiicient  to  attach  a  demonstra- 
tive sense  to  the  symbols.  It  is  such  an  evidence  as 
is  more  than  would  be  demanded  in  the  case  of  an 
allegory  which  represented  an  unknown  reality,  or 
which  made  an  announcement,  the  positive  truth  of 
which  could  not  be  subjected  to  a  test.  But  the  pro- 
phetic allegory  contains  a  representation  of  realities 
of  a  very  certain  character,  namely,  events.     Here 


DEFINITENESS    OF   THE   ALLEGORY.  91 

comes  tlie  searching  and  trying  test,  and  wlien  ful- 
filled the  second  grand  demonstration.  Tlie  significa- 
tions of  the  signs,  with  all  the  manifestation  of  j)lot 
and  design  wliich  they  disclose,  which,  in  a  long  and 
complex  allegory  such  as  the  Eevelation,  is  great, 
stand  in  correspondence  with  a  series  of  events  in 
history,  and  are  registered  and  checked  off  one  after 
another  by  those  events.  Here  is  a  demonstration  of 
sense  which  ho  composition,  except  the  iyro])lietiG 
allegory,  can  yield.  It  is  a  demonstration  only  to 
be  found  within  the  compass  of  inspiration.  The 
sense  of  the  signs  is  here  demonstrated,  first  of  all  by 
the  combined  powers  of  the  language  and  the  alle- 
gory which  work  out  this  result.  The  demonstrated 
sense  is  a  second  time  demonstrated,  and  in  a  much 
more  powerful  manner,  by  a  series  of  events  happen- 
ing which  respond  and  answer  to  the  intimations  of 
the  signs  thus  determined.  Here  is  a  demonstration 
at  which  science  and  mathematics  must  fall  prostrate. 
I^either  the  one  nor  the  other  in  their  loftiest  flights 
ever  conceived  the  execution  of  such  a  j)roblem  as 
this.  It  is  a  demonstration  which  can  only  exist, 
and  which  does  exist  in  the  pages  of  inspiration.  It 
is  exhibited  in  the  Revelation  in  its  highest  jDerfection. 
But  all  the  three  elements  above  mentioned  are 
requisite  to  this  demonstration.  But  of  the  three 
only  two  have  as  yet  been  in  operation,  and  even 
these  have  not  been  brought  to  bear  on  the  gigantic 
problem  which  really  still  remains  unsolved,  with  in- 
tegrity and  with  full  intensity  of  effect.  We  refer  to 
the  firSt  and  the  last.     The  second  has  hardly  been 


92  DEFINITENESS   OF  THE  ALLEGORY. 

put  in  requisition  at  all.  Yet  it  is  indispensably  re- 
quisite to  the  demonstration,  because  it  is  by  it,  in 
combination  with  the  first,  that  the  significations  of 
the  signs  are  fixed  Avith  a  definiteness  and  precision, 
that  is  absolute.  "Without  the  presence  of  this  essen- 
tial element  the  sense  can  only  be  determined,  gene- 
rally. The  interpretations  of  the  hieroglyphic  lan- 
guage rendered  in  one  part  of  Scripture,  are  com- 
petent alone  to  contribute  the  general^  and  by  no 
means  the  jparticular  sense  of  symbols  in  another.  It 
is  the  allegory  itself,  with  its  perceived  unity  of  de- 
sign, at  once  in  internal  subject  and  in  outward  form, 
with  the  realized  exhibition  of  these  a  second  time 
in  the  reduplication  of  the  allegory,  and  again  with 
the  apprehended  quaternal  structure  of  it  repeated, 
which  moulds  the  whole  composition  in  unity  of  form. 
It  is  alone  upon  the  recognition  in  all  its  parts  of  this 
great  phenomenon  of  design,  which  a  complicated 
prophetic  allegory  displays,  that  demonstration  can 
be  founded.  It  is  alone  upon  the  sure  and  stable 
foundation  of  2i  fixed  sense^  that  the  massive  and  pon- 
derous superstructure  of  demonstration  can  be  built. 
It  is  the  vainest  folly  to  attempt  to  raise  this  mag- 
nificent pile  on  the  loose  sand  of  figurative  language, 
as  has  been  shown.  It  is  also  vain  to  try  to  rear  it  on 
the  tougher  material  of  the  hieroglyphic  language 
itself.  The  second  element  above  mentioned  must  be 
combined  with  it.  It  is  alone  the  complication  of 
design  displayed  in  the  allegory  w^hich  sheathes  every 
symbol  in  it  with  a  sense  that  is  not  only  fixed  but 
demonstrative.     When  this  result  is  obtained,  there 


DEFINITENESS   OF  THE  ALLEGORY.  93 

arises  not  only  one  demonstration,  bnt  two.  It  is 
perfectly  evident  tliat  a  demonstration  cannot  really 
exist  where  the  sense  of  the  symbol  is  determinable 
by  the  event  which  this  symbol  predicts.  The  reason- 
ing is  here  conducted  in  the  form  of  the  circle,  which, 
although  beautiful  in  the  works  of  fancy,  is  a  form 
that  is  outlawed  in  reasoning.  The  strength  of  demon- 
stration lies  alone  in  the  fact  that  the  sense  is  fixed 
independently  of  the  event.  This  being  done,  the 
one  demonstration  which  can  alone  be  reached  by 
this  method,  becomes  instantly  a  twofold  one.  The 
allegory  demonstratively  interprets  itself — this  is  one 
demonstration ;  and  the  events  demonstratively  inter- 
pret the  allegory — this  is  a  second. 

But  the  demonstration  which,  when  properly 
made,  is  not  only  perfect,  bnt  twofold,  is  altogether 
imperfect  when  the  second  step  of  it  is  not  performed  ; 
and  it  is  vitiated  by  the  reasoning  in  a  circle  above 
referred  to.  There  exists  in  the  absence  of  the  second 
element  of  demonstration,  the  want  of  a  solid  founda- 
tion on  which  to  build  ;  the  senses  are  loose  and  in- 
determinable. There  is  an  important  hiatus  in  the 
argument ;  there  is  a  yawning  chasm  which  consists 
in  the  merely  general  sense  of  the  signs,  down  which 
profound  chasm,  and  up  the  steep  ascent  of  which, 
commentators  may  have  been  seen  for  centuries  ven- 
turing with  audacity,  scrambling  with  toil,  now  ob- 
taining some  valuable  results,  but  not  one  of  them 
succeeding  to  reach  the  frowning  opposite  height. 
The  senses  of  the  symbols  without  the  second  element, 
which  is  absolutely  requisite  to  the  demonstration, 


94  DEFINITENESS    OF   THE   ALLEGORY. 

are  merely  general ;  accordingly  they  may  be  applied 
to  a  great  variety  of  events.  They  have  accordingly 
no  fixed,  and,  therefore,  no  real  significance. 

All  commentators  who  have  written  on  the  book 
of  Revelation,  without  exception,  have  been  content 
to  woriv  with  the  first  and  the  last  of  these  elements  of 
demonstration.  They  have  even  held  them  in  them- 
selves to  be  demonstrative.  This  they  truly  are  in 
regard  to  certain  portions  of  the  prophecy ;  portions 
that  furnish  a  minutise  of  detail  sufiicient  to  constitute 
in  itself  demonstrative  evidence.  The  portraiture  of 
the  two  Beasts  in  ch.  xiii.,  may  be  justly  held  to 
afi'ord  evidence  of  this  description,  and  some  other 
parts  of  the  book.  But  this  is  far  from  being  the  case 
with  a  considerable  part  of  it.  The  portraitures 
are  general,  and  have  no  fixed  significancy  apart 
from  the  allegory  in  which  they  are  contained.  They 
are  loose  stones  not  ^^et  compacted  into  the  edifice. 
The  two  elements  alone  are  by  no  means  sufiicient  to 
furnish  forth  a  demonstration  of  a  great  2)ortion  of 
the  prophecy,  and,  what  is  most  important,  of  the 
whole  of  it.  The  demonstration  of  it  can  hardly,  in 
strict  truth,  be  said  to  be  made  until  the  whole  of  it 
is  proven;  and  it  is  questionable  if  even  the  demon- 
stration of  the  parts  of  it  which  have  been  made,  are 
entitled  to  rank  as  such  until  the  sense  of  the  whole 
is  proved  and  demonstrated. 

Various  means  have  been  had  recourse  to  in  order 
to  supply  this  lack  of  demonstrative  evidence,  and  in 
crossing  this  chasm  we  have  indicated  to  obtain  a 
sure  footing,  and  various  expedients  have  been  used 


DEFINITENESS    OF   THE   ALLEGORY.  95 

to  traverse  this  wide  gulf  wliicli  yawns  between  the 
partially  known  and  the  absolutely  certain.  A 
strong  and  exact  parallelism  has  been  made  out  be- 
tween the  sign  and  a  certain  suj)posed  event.  A 
parallelism  so  close  and  exact  is  shown  to  exist,  as  to 
afford  demonstrative  evidence,  it  is  thought,  that  the 
event  is  signified  by  the  sign.  But  the  evidence  is 
not  always  to  this  effect,  for  frequently  not  one,  but 
m'any  of  such  coincidences  are  to  be  found.  Still  this 
is  the  process,  being  the  only  practical  one,  which  is 
resorted  to,  and  it  opens  a  wide  field  for  ingenuity 
and  ratiocination.  A  device  has  recently  been  intro- 
duced to  heighten,  as  it  is  considered,  the  argument. 
The  works  of  a  historian  who  goes  over  much  of  the 
same  ground  occupied  by  the  prophecy,  and  who 
deals  largely  in  metaphors,  we  refer  especially  to 
Gibbon,  have  been  ransacked,  in  order  to  detect  a 
coincidence  between  his  figurative  language  and  the 
symbolic  language  of  the  Eevelation.  This  can 
liardly  be  regarded  as  more  than  one  of  the  idle  sports 
in  which  commentators  on  this  book  indulge.  Of 
what  value  is  such  a  coincidence  ?  It  can  be  of  none 
whatever,  as  well  on  account  of  its  sheer  commonness 
and  indefiniteness,  as  for  another  reason.  It  must 
have  been  either  accidental  or  designed.  If  acci- 
dental, it  is  of  no  account,  and  if  designed,  then  in- 
spiration must  have  been  present,  which  can  hardly 
be  imagined.  This  may  be  regarded  as  a  dernier  re- 
sort to  increase  the  probability,  and  the  last  expiring 
effort  of  the  mind  to  clutch  certainty.  Upon  the^ 
system  followed,  the  sole  excellency  of  one  commen- 


96  DEFINITENESS   OF  THE   ALLEGORY. 

tator  over  another  lies  in  the  superior  adjustment  of 
the  scale  of  probabilities,  so  as  to  obtain  a  superior 
probability  in  the  whole  for  the  scheme  of  events 
which  he  supposes  the  prophecy  to  predict.  But  such 
a  probability,  however  high  it  may  reach,  is  still  un- 
satisfactory ;  it  is  not  what  the  mind  longs  for  and 
reasonably  demands  in  this  case :  it  is  certainty,  oh- 
solute  certainty. 

ISTow  how  is  this  chasm,  which  really  yawns  be- 
tween probability  and  certainty — this  chasm  which 
separates  the  imperfectly  Icnown  from  absolutely  cer- 
tain and  demonstrative  truth — to  be  crossed.  It  is 
alone  to  be  passed  by  bringing  the  second  element  in 
the  demonstration,  as  stated  above,  into  play.  This 
chasm  cannot  be  crossed  by  being  descended  into,  for 
a  host  of  commentators  have  been  lost  in  it.  They 
have  been  seen  boldly  leaping  into  the  abyss  of  the 
general  sense  of  the  symbols.  Some  have  descended 
deeper  than  others  into  this  spacious  chasm,  and  have 
been  lost  forever  to  view.  A  few  have  preserved  a 
precarious  foothold,  but  it  is  needless  to  say  that  none 
have  reached  the  beetling  opposite  side.  This  is  a 
chasm  which  must  be  bridged  over,  for  it  is  not  only 
dangerous,  but  it  is  in  the  nature  of  things  impossible 
to  cross  it  otherwise.  A  bridge  ?  But  who  will  con- 
struct the  bridge  ?  The  Spirit  of  the  living  God  will  do 
this — ^has  done  it.  A  bridge  exists,  although  it  has 
been  invisible.  The  way  to  it  lies  through  the  Old 
Testament  Scriptures.  In  these  ancient  writings  there 
is  revealed  a  code  of  laws  to  which  the  prophetic  alle- 
gory is  subjected,  dating  as  far  back  as  the  time  of 


DEFINITENESS   OF   THE   ALLEGORY.  97 

Moses,  which  invests  its  signs  with  those  demonstra- 
tively fixed  senses  of  which  we  are  in  quest,  and  which 
are  necessary  to  complete  the  demonstration.  The 
demonstration  may  now  be  accomplished.  The  inter- 
preter, standing  on  this  bridge,  which  though  light  and 
airy  is  strong  as  adamant,  occupies  a  most  command- 
ing position,  and  beholds  before  him  the  most  magni- 
ficent panorama  which  has  ever  spread  itself  out  to  the 
intellectual  eye  of  man.  What  does  he  behold  ?  He 
sees,  on  the  one  hand,  the  once  mysterious  signs  of 
God's  prophecy  arise,  beaming  with  the  light  of  intel- 
ligence and  burning  with  demonstrative  power ;  on 
the  other,  he  sees  the  events  of  the  world's  history, 
marshalled  in  order,  and  extending  their  distinct 
outlines  and  mighty  forms,  and  answering  them 
back.  Here  he  sees  at  once  a  demonstration  /  a  7'eve- 
lation^  a  prophecT/,  and  a  history. 

The  demonstration  here,  which,  as  has  been  shown, 
is  in  truth  twofold,  lies  then  in  the  fact  that  the  sense 
of  the  prophecy  is  demonstrated,  independently  of  the 
event,  by  the  allegory  and  its  language  combined  ; 
and  that,  thus  fixed  and  demonstrated,  it  is  a  second 
time  proved  to  be  right  by  the  event,  and  accordingly 
is  a  second  time  demonstrated.  The  sense,  then,  is 
twice  proved,  and  it  is  in  the  second  proof  that  the 
truth  of  the  prophecy  is  involved.  But  if  the  middle 
step  of  the  threefold  process  of  demonstration  be  not 
performed,  there  is  not  even  one  demonstration  ob- 
tained. On  the  contrary,  there  is  the  chasm  of  which 
we  have  just  spoken.  It  is  only  when  the  three  con- 
ditions are  fulfilled  that  a  demonstration  is  the  result, 
6 


98  DEFINITENESS   OF  THE  ALLEGOET. 

and  tlien  it  is  a  double  one.  In  tlie  second  and  last 
of  tliese,  which  is  infinitely  the  more  powerful  of  the 
two,  since  history,  with  her  long  array  of  stubborn 
facts,  forms  an  element  of  it,  the  truth  of  the  sense 
and  of  the  prophecy  itself,  is  proved  in  the  same 
breath.  The  announcement  is  then  made  in  a  tone 
of  such  ineffable  clearness,  matchless  articulation, 
and  piercing  power,  as  proves  it  to  be  the  utterance 
of  heaven. 

When  these  three  elements  at  once  of  elucidation 
and  of  demonstration,  which  they  are,  have  been 
brought  to  bear  on  the  w^ork  of  interpretation,  it  will 
then  be  seen  how  clear,  how  definite,  and  how  certain 
the  meaning  of  the  j^rophecy  is.  There  will,  then,  be 
no  ground  for  complaint,  that  the  Revelation  is  unin- 
telligible ;  it  will  be  the  most  intelligible  of  all  writ- 
ings. 

Let  ns,  for  the  sake  of  example,  and  in  order  to 
see  the  efi'ect  of  the  combination  of  the  three  elements 
in  the  demonstration,  as  stated  above,  take  a  single 
symbol  from  the  book,  and  subject  its  application  to 
the  threefold  test  which  these  afi'ord.  An  experiment 
or  two  of  this  kind  will  show  what  a  strength  of 
demonstrative  power  resides  in  the  prophecy. 

Let  ns  take  the  Whore,  whose  mystical  name  is 
Babylon,  for  an  example.  We  know  that  the  Harlot 
is  a  symbol  which  can  only  stand  for  a  false  church, 
for  the  reason  that  we  know  certainly  the  bride^  who 
is  called  the  Lamb's  wife,  Rev.  xxi.  9,  stands  for  the 
true  church.  Of  necessity  the  harlot  stands  for  the 
false   church.     Let  it  be  granted  that  it  is  at  first 


DEFTNITENESS   OF  THE  ALLEGORY.  99 

doubtful  what  particular  church  it  is  which  is  thus 
signified.  It  will  not  be  at  all  doubtful  when  a  few 
criteria  are  applied  to  the  symbols,  because  it  will 
then  be  seen  that  only  one  church  can  answer  these. 
Thus  the  church  signified  must  be  one  whicli  has  its 
seat  at  a  city  known  in  history  by  the  characteristic 
of  being  built  on  seven  hills,  from  whence  the  church 
signified  "  reigneth  over  the  kings  of  the  earth." 
See  Kev.,  xvii.  It  must  be  one  in  combination  with 
a  great  temporal  power  which  reigned  at  the  same 
city,  as  appears  from  the  description.  This  city  must 
exhibit,  in  the  course  of  its  history,  seven  distinct 
forms  of  government,  to  which  seven  this  said  tem- 
poral power  forms  the  eighth.  This  temporal  power 
must  hold  a  supremacy  over  a  number  of  kingdoms, 
which,  let  it  be  admitted,  is  either  ten  literally,  or 
symbolically  in  the  sense  of  a  great  number.  This 
supremacy  is  of  such  a  nature  that  the  kingdoms, 
although  acknowledging  it,  carry  on  their  own  gov- 
ernment, since  the  horns  which  symbolize  them  are 
represented  as  bearing  crowns.  All  that  is  said  of  the 
Harlot,  and  there  is  much  said  of  her,  must  correspond 
with  the  known  history  of  the  church  to  which  the 
symbol  is  applied.  All  that  is  said  of  the  False 
Prophet  must  likewise  correspond  with  the  history  of 
this  church,  for  the  False  ProjDhet  is  a  synonymous 
symbol.  Still  further,  (and  here  the  tests  to  which  the 
symbol  must  be  subjected  multiply  to  an  enormous  ex- 
tent,) all  that  is  said  of  the  Two-horned  Beast,  which 
is  another  synonymous  symbol,  and  of  which  there  is 
a  long  and  very  minute  description,  containing  some 


100  DEFINITENESS   OF  THE   ALLEGORY. 

very  searching  tests,  amongst  others  a  number  to  fix 
the  name,  must  correspond  with  the  history  of  the 
church  to  which  the  Whore  has  been  applied.     This 
correspondence  between  symbolic  imagery  and  events 
must  again  stand  in  unison  with  the  ]3articulars  in 
the  long  and  minute  description  which  is  rendered  of 
the  Ten-horned  Beast,  which  stands  a  second  time  for 
that  temporal  j)ower  with  which  the  church  in  ques- 
tion is  in  combination.     Still  further,  all  that  is  said 
of  these  two  Beasts,  and  the  application  made  of  them, 
must  not  jar,  but  be  in  perfect  harmony  with  all  that 
is  said  of  the  Great  Red  Dragon  and  the  application 
given  to  it ;  for  this  is  the  symbol  of  a  j^ower  that 
ruled  in  the  very  same  city  prior  to  the  time  of  these 
two,  but  which  was  ejected  from  it,  and  which,  in 
that  other  part  of  the  world  to  which  it  was  driven, 
associated  itself    with   those   two   in   persecuting   a 
church    distinguished    by   its    moral    and   spiritual 
purity.     "What  is  said  of  the  1260  years'  duration  of 
the  efflorescent  power  of  these  three  political  powers, 
must  be  found  verified  in  their  history.     But  more ; 
all  that  is  said  of  the  Seven  Trumpets,  in  which  there 
are  long  and  minute  descriptions,  must  tally  with  the 
events  to  which  they  are  applied,  which  events  must 
tally  again  with  the  history  of  these  three,  because 
these  trumpets  represent  judgments  in  war  upon  that 
three-fold  dominion  which  is  associated  with  that  seven- 
hilled   city  to  which  they  trace  their  power.     But 
farther ;  every  thing  that  is  said  of  the  Seven  Yials, 
which  are  judgments  on  these  j)Owers,  must  stand  in 
correspondence  with  the  history  of  these  three,  while 


DEFINITENESS   OF  THE  ALLEGOKT.  101 

the  fulfilment  of  the  Seven  Yials  mnst  be  recognized 
in  a  series  of  events,  the  whole  of  which  must  be  col- 
located within  a  comparatively  short  space  of  time, 
since  they  are  the  Seven  Last  Plagues,  and  all  ^  of 
which  must  respond  in  every  respect  to  the  symboli- 
cal imagery.  But  farther;  the  first  of  these  Yials 
must  be  shown  to  fall  out  coincidently  with  the  ter- 
mination of  the  1260  years,  as  that  prophecy  has 
been  applied,  and  the  other  six  must  follow  in 
regular  order  and  succession.  Finally  ;  all  this  cor- 
respondence which  has  by  no  means  been  developed, 
but  has  been  merely  hinted  at,  must  stand  in  perfect 
unison  and  harmony  with  the  representations  made 
of  these  three  powers  in  the  second,  third,  and  fourth 
seals,  as  they  are  first  represer^ted  and  described.  It 
can  hardly  be  denied  that  an  amount  of  evidence 
may  be  thus  adduced  for  the  signification  and  ap- 
plication of  the  Whore,  which  is  nothing  short  of 
mathematical  proof.  The  propliecy,  in  virtue  of  the 
unity  of  conception  which  marks  its  plan,  contributes 
light  from  every  quarter  of  it,  and  hence  a  multitude 
of  rays  converge  and  meet  on  the  head  of  this  Whore, 
revealing  her  in  light,  with  a  demonstrative  and  at 
the  same  time  a  condemning  and  consuming  coinci- 
dence. 

It  matters  little  whicli  symbol  we  take  uj) ;  every 
one  must  run  nearly  the  same  gauntlet.  Is  it  the 
Fifth  Trumpet,  which  has  been  applied  to  the  inva- 
sions of  the  Saracens  ?  It  must  first  of  all  be  found 
that  the  minute  symbolical  description  of  the  judg- 
ment predicted,  which  is  necessaril}^,  from  the  char- 


102  DEFINITENESS   OF   THE   ALLEGOEY. 

acter  of  tlie  symbol  emplo^^ed  a  judgment  in  war,  has 
been  truly  realized  in  the  invasions  of  the  Saracens, 
and  this  test  itself  certainly  no  other  CA^ent  in  history 
will  fulfil.  But  this,  important  as  it  is,  is  a  mere 
fractional  part  of  the  proof  to  which  the  application 
of  this  trumpet  must  be  subjected.  Yet  this  proof 
has  been  held  by  many  to  be  demonstrative  ;  and  in- 
asmuch a^  the  description  is  minute,  and  it  contains  a 
chronical  test,  it  is  worthy  of  being  so  ranked.  But 
there  must. have  been  an  event  preceding  that  pre- 
dicted, which  responds  to  the  imagery  of  the  Fourth 
Trumpet  ;  an  event  preceding  that  again  which 
responds  to  the  imagery  of  the  Third  Trumpet ;  an 
event  preceding  that  which  responds  to  the  symboli- 
cal picture  under  the.  Second  ;  and  an  event  which 
responds  in  like  manner  to  that  of  the  First.  The 
fulfilment  of  the  Fifth  Trumpet  must  thus  stand  fifth 
in  order  of  such  a  series  of  events.  But  this  is  not 
all ;  it  has  to  be  followed  by  another  great  warlike 
invasion,  which  must  be  of  such  a  character  that  it 
responds  to  the  imagery  of  the  Sixth  Trumpet.  The 
imagery  here  is  of  a  still  more  minute  and  searching 
kind  than  even  that  of  the  Fifth  Trumpet,  and  it  con- 
tains like  that  also  a  chronical  test.  But  the  Trumpet 
in  question  must  be  followed  again  second  in  order 
by  a  judgment,  which  exhausts  the  terms  of  the 
Seventh  Trumpet,  which  predicts  events  of  such  a 
kind  and  such  magnitude,  that  they  cannot  be  con- 
ceived to  happen  twice  in  the  history  of  the  world. 
Let  any  one  attempt  to  calculate  the  chance  that  there 
is  after  all  these  tests  are  exhausted  of  a  wrong  ap- 


DEFINITENESS   OF   THE   ALLEGORY.  103 

plication  having  been  made  of  the  Fifth  Trumpet  to 
the  Saracenic  invasion.  He  will  doubtless  find  it  to 
be  infinitesimally  small.  But  this  is  a  mere  portion  of 
the  proof  by  which  the  application  of  the  Fifth  Trum- 
pet to  the  Saracenic  invasion  is  fortified.  The  event 
to  which  this  trumpet  is  applied,  must  also  be  suc- 
ceeded by  a  series  of  seven  events,  happening  in 
regular  order  and  procession,  corresponding  to  the" 
descriptions' under  the  Seven  Yials,  w^hich  events  must 
be  such  as  are  congregated  within  a  cornparatively 
short  space  of  time ;  for  tliese  vials  are  the  Seven  Last 
Plagues,  a  circumstance  which,  as  it  restricts  the  ap- 
plication, increases  in  a  corresponding  ratio  the  de- 
monstrative power  which  the  parallelism  between  the 
imagery  and  the  events  afi'ords.  But  the  first  of 
these  Yials  must  be  shown  to  have  had  its  fulfilment 
in  an  event,  which  happened  coincidently  with  the 
termination  of  a  period  proved  to  have  had  its  com- 
mencement J  260  years  previously.  This  is  a  most 
exacting  test.  The  first  Yial  must  not  only  be  the 
first  of  seven  judgments  following  in  quick  succession, 
but  it  must  happen  precisely  1260  years  distant  from 
a  certain  well-marked  event,  which  must  fulfil  the 
test  of  being  tlie  opening  of  the  1260  years  ;  and 
which  event  is  the  establishment  of  that  temporal 
dominion  which,  as  has  been  seen  above,  is  in  com- 
bination with  the  spiritual  power  symbolized  by  the 
Harlot.  But  this  is  but  a  j)ortion,  and  only  a  small 
portion  of  the  proof  which  fixes  the  true  application 
of  the  Fifth  Trumpet,  for  we  have  not  yet  entered 
the  great  current  of  demonstration  which  is  running 


104  DEFINITENESS   OF  THE  ALLEGORY. 

in  the  body  of  tlie  prophecy,  and  which  is  derived 
from  the  minute  descriptions  rendered  in  it  of  the 
dominions  it  contains,  and  of  the  events  predicted  in 
it  in  connection  with  the  history  of  these  dominions. 
With  all  of  these,  with  the  whole  prophecy,  in  fact, 
the  Fifth  Trumpet  must  stand  in  connection,  and  in 
undisturbed  harmony  and  correspondence. 

Take  any  Trumx^et  it  must  stand  the  same  test,  or 
any  Vial,  or  any  symbol  whatever  in  the  book,  they 
must  all  stand  the  same  test.  "Will  any  one  venture 
to  say,  or  can  any  one  with  justice  maintain,  that  a 
symbol  which  has  passed  through  an  ordeal  such  as 
this,  is  not  rightly  applied,  or  that  the  application  of  it 
is  not  a  demonstration  of  the  highest  rank  and  order. 
This  demonstrative  power  rests  first  in  the  fixity  of 
the  sense  of  the  symbols ;  and  secondly,  in  the  fact 
that  this  being  clear  and  definite,  the  application  of  a 
single  symbol  involves  in  its  train  the  application  of 
all  the  symbols  in  the  book. 

It  might  be  considered  sufiicient,  and  it  has  long 
been  held  such,  to  show  that  the  imagery  of  the  Fifth 
Trumpet  responds  to  the  Saracenic  invasion,  or  that 
the  symbolical  picture  under  the  Fourth  Vial  answers 
to  the  devastating  power  of  the  French  Empire  when 
its  destinies  were  w^ielded  by  ^Napoleon  I.  Bat  this 
strict  correspondence  of  the  symbolical  imagery  with 
the  event  is,  as  we  see,  but  a  very  small  part  indeed 
of  the  real  demonstrative  evidence,  if,  in  some  cases,  it 
can  be  called  such.  The  symbolical  representation 
made  must  not  only  stand  in  exact  correspondence 
with  the  application  given  to  it,  but  the  symbolical 


DEFINITENESS   OF  THE  ALLEGORY.  105 

imagery  of  the  whole  book  must  be  in  harmony  with 
the  particular  application.  This  results  from  that  effi- 
cient manner  in  which  all  the  parts  of  the  prophecy 
are  dove-tailed  and  welded  into  each  other,  in  virtue 
of  its  unity  of  purpose  and  design.  It  is  thus  quite 
impossible  to  prove  the  application  of  any  single  sym- 
bol, without  bringing  the  whole  imagery  of  the  book, 
charged  with  the  utmost  weight  of  demonstrative- 
power,  to  sustain  the  proof  of  it.  "What  a  marA^el- 
lous  instance  of  the  divine  wisdom  is  here  exhibited  ? 
A  prophecy  is  delivered,  wrapt  in  all  the  secrets  of 
enigma,  dark,  dubious,  uncertain  of  meaning  at  the 
first,  but  which,  in  the  end,  when  ages  have  elapsed, 
and,  after  its  fulfilment  is  accomplished,  stands  forth 
clad  in  an  angelic  vesture  of  demonstration,  before 
which  the  distinctness  of  literal  language  must  hide 
its  head  abashed.  She,  although  made  too  the  hand- 
maid of  the  Deity,  belongs  to  the  race  of  mortals ; 
this  one  is  of  purely  celestial  birth.  She  speaks — 
and  speaks  demonstrations.  These  may  be  rivalled, 
not  surpassed  by  that  other  "  daughter  of  the  skies  " 
that  at  midnight  chases  the  stars  in  their  courses  and 
writes  down  in  algebraic  signs  the  secrets  of  the 
heavens.  The  one  sweeps  the  boundless  fields  of  air ; 
the  other  the  vast  abyss  of  the  future.  Both  use  se- 
cret signs ;  and  both  demonstrate. 


CHAPTEE  YII. 

THE  FIRST  STEP  TO  UNDERSTAND   A   PROPHETIC   ALLEGORY 
IS  TO  UNDERSTAND  THE  FIRST  REPRESENTATION. 

Having  tlms,  as  we  conceive,  sufficiently  consider- 
ed the  dark  side  of  the  allegory,  and  having  only  indi- 
cated one  principle  of  light,  let  ns  now  turn  to  the 
process  which  must  be  employed  to  illuminate  the 
opacity  which  it  has,  and  to  bring  out  its  clear,  bright, 
and  lustrous  side,  for  it  has  this,  too. 

To  understand  the  second  or  real  sense  of  an  alle- 
gory, it  is  absolutely  necessary  to  understand  the  first 
representation.  This  is  the  foundation  of  the  second 
or  real  sense.  If  we  do  not  understand  the  first  sense, 
it  is  certain  we  shall  never  understand  the  second. 

To  understand  the  first  or  immediate  representa- 
tion of  an  allegory  delivered  in  words,  two  things  are 
requisite.     It  is  necessary 

\st.  To  imderstand  the  words ;  and 

2cZ.  To  understand  the  subject  which  these  words 
bring  before  the  mind  in  their  literal  acceptation, 
which  is  the  first  sense. 

In  respect  to  the  Revelation,  the  words  are  Greek, 
and  of  these  we  have,  in  the  common  version,  a  trans- 


THE  FIEST  EEPKESENTATION.  107 

lation,  which  is,  to  all  important  purposes,  correct  and 
faithful,  with  the  two  following  exceptions. 

The  first  is  the  mistranslation  of  ra  recra-apa  ^coa, 
which  is  mistranslated  in  the  common  version  by 
"  The  Four  Beasts."  The  rendering  here  ought  to  be 
The  four  living  creatures^  as  is  universally  admitted. 
This  translation  brings  before  the  mind  a  proper  con- 
ception of  w^hat  is  meant,  and  associates  the  symbol 
with  the  living  creatures  of  Ezekiel,  and  also  with  the 
cherubim  elsewhere  mentioned. 

The  second .  mistranslation  is  that  of  the  Greek 
word  a/3i/o-o-o?,  which  is  improperly  rendered  in  the 
common  version  "  bottomless  pit."  This  ought  to 
be  the  alnjss  of  the  sea.  The  bottomless  pit  is 
calculated  to  convey  to  the  mind  an  erroneous  idea 
of  the  meaning,  and  to  associate  it  with  the  pit  of 
hell,  with  which  the  word  in  the  original  has  no  com- 
munity wdiatever.  It  imports  the  ahyss^  and  is  the 
etymon  of  our  English  word.  It  is  employed  in  the 
book  as  a  synonym.  For  ^dXacra-a^  another  word, 
which,  in  the  original,  signifies  simply  the  sea,  that 
the  two  expressions  are  in  the  original  text  perfectly 
synonymous,  is  evident  from  the  circumstance  alone 
that  the  Ten-horned  Beast,  which  is  said  to  have  arisen 
out  of  "the  sea,"  Rev.  xiii.  1,  is  afterwards  called, 
Rev.  xvii.  9,  the  beast  that  shall  ascend  out  of  the 
bottomless  pit,  i.  e.  the  abyss.  The  "  sea "  or  the 
"  abyss  of  the  sea  "  would  be  a  correct  rendering  in 
the  latter  case. 

But,  in  the  second  place,  besides  understanding 
the  w^ords,  we  must  also  understand  wdiat  the  repre- 


108  THE  FIRST   REPRESENTATION. 

sentation  is  which  these  words  make.  It  might,  at 
first,  be  conceived  that  the  full  understanding  of  the 
sense  of  the  words  of  necessity  involves  the  under- 
standing of  the  subject  which  these  words  present. 
In  most  cases,  such  a  comprehension  of  the  meaning 
would  infallibly  follow.  It  is  to  be  borne  in  mind, 
however,  that  allegories  are  endowed  with  a  second 
sense,  which  is  moreover  the  main  one,  which  always 
exerts  an  important  influence  on  the  tenor  of  the  first 
representation.  The  weaker  that  the  allegoric  or 
enigmatical  element  is,  the  less  this  influence  is  felt. 
In  most  of  the  parables  delivered  by  Christ  himself, 
the  first  representation  is  easily  understood,  and  is 
distinguished  by  great  congruity,  smoothness,  and  easi- 
ness of  apprehension.  It  consists,  for  the  most  part,  of  a 
simple  narrative,  one  or  two  of  the  salient  points  alone 
of  wJiich  contain  an  allegoric  sense.  The  same  may 
be  said  of  all  those  allegories  of  Scripture,  of  which 
the  second  sense  is  a  moral  or  spiritual  truth.  But 
with  the  prophetic  it  is  very  difl'erent.  The  enigmat- 
ical element  is  here  developed  in  a  state  of  excess 
which  tends  greatly  to  obscure  and  cloud  the  first 
representation.  To  predict  the  intractable  events  of 
history  the  allegory  is  strained,  and,  even  to  a  certain 
extent,  distorted,  and  to  attain  increased  definiteness, 
a  hieroglyphic  language  is  employed,  which  is  more 
devoted  to  the  second  than  to  the  first  sense.  The 
consequence  is  that  the  first  representation  of  a  pro- 
phetic allegory  sufl'ers  in  point  of  naturalness  and 
obviousness  of  meaning.  It  is  no  matter  which  of  the 
prophetic  allegories  we  take  up,  we  find  it  pervaded 


THE  FIRST  KEPEESENTATION.  109 

by  a  certain  unnaturalness  and  incongruity  in  the  first 
representation.  Is  it  the  short  allegory  in  Zech. 
eh.  i.  ?  Here  four  horns  are  rei^resented  as  scattering 
Judah,  Israel,  and  Jerusalem,  while  four  carpenters 
are  represented  to  come  and  fray  them.  How  can 
four  horns,  apart  from  living  animals  as  they  are  rep- 
resented, be  conceived  to  exist  as  agents,  which  they 
are  here  said  to  be  ?  The  idea  is  an  unnatural  and 
fantastic  one.  But  the  first  sense  is  here  entirely 
subjected  to,  and  is  sacrificed  for,  the  second.  The 
prophet  u^s  four  horns  as  a  symbol  of  dominion,  and 
he  has  much  more  in  view  the  second  sense  of  dominion 
than  the  first  of  horns.  In  like  manner,  the  reflection 
naturally  arises  in  regard  to  the  prediction  delivered  to 
Pharaoh :  how  is  it  conceivable  that  seven  lean  kine 
should  eat  up  seven  fat  kine,  or,  more  monstrous  still, 
that  seven  thin  ears  of  corn  shonld  eat  up  seven  good 
ears.  This  distortion  and  meagreness  of  sense  in  the 
first  representation  is  apt  to  dispose  the  mind  to  the 
supposition,  that  that  whicli  is  so  devoid  of  meaning 
in  the  first  representation  is  destitute  of  it  in  the 
second  representation  likewise.  Here,  however,  the 
mind  would  draw  a  very  erroneous  conclusion.  It  is 
just  in  the  proportion  that  the  first  sense  is  weak, 
poor  and  frivolous,  that  the  second  is  a  strong,  rich, 
and  solid  one.  It  is  in  virtue  of  the  poorness  and 
meagreness  of  the  first  representation  that  the  second 
is  charged  with  meaning. 

But  here  also.  Scripture  herself  comes  to  our  help, 
as  she  does  in  the  hieroglyphic  language,  with  which 
she  clothes  the  allegory,  giving  it  thereby  increased  pre- 


110  THE  FIKST  KEPEESENTATION". 

cision  and  definiteness.  While  it  is  impossible  to  save 
the  first  sense,  for  this  is  sacrificed  to  the  second,  she 
constructs  for  the  prophetic  allegory  certain  laws, 
which,  in  a  great  degree,  redeem  the  first  representa- 
tion from  Tinnaturalness  and  irrationality,  by  infusing 
into  it  the  principles  of  order  and  congruity  of  ar- 
rangement, and  make  it  entirely  useful,  in  a  practical 
respect,  for  conveying  the  second  sense,  which  is  its 
object.  These,  at  the  same  time  render  it,  however 
long,  perplexed  and  involved,  as  is  the  case  in  the 
Revelation,  sufficiently  intelligible.     Thes«  laws  are  : 

1^^.  Tlie  law  of  unity  of  design; 

2<^.  The  law  of  reduj)lication ; 

Sd.  And  the  law  of  the  quaternal  structure. 

According  to  the  first  of  these  laws,  perfect  unity 
of  design  prevails  throughout  the  allegorical  compo- 
sition, and  gives  it  at  once  symmetry  and  coherence. 
This  feature,  which  characterizes  the  composition,  is 
only  a  natural  result  of  that  unity  of  conception, 
which,  as  we  have  shown,  is  a  fundamental  principle 
of  the  allegory  itself.  The  high  importance  of  this 
law  towards  the  following  out  and  the  unravelling  of 
the  thread  of  the  first  representation,  as  well  as  of 
the  second,  is  sufficiently  apparent. 

According  to  the  second  law,  the  allegory  appears 
a  second  time  in  a  new  dress  of  imagery.  This  du- 
plication affords  a  powerful  instrument  for  the  appre- 
hension of  its  true  relations.  It  has  this  effect,  not 
only  in  virtue  of  the  repetition  by  fresh  imagery,  but 
by  reason  of  the  comparison  which  may  be  instituted 
between  the  two  allegories,  and  the  consequent  check 


THE   FIRST   REPRESENTATION.  Ill 

thereby  afforded  to  erroneous  conceptions  of  meaning, 
wliicli  might,  and  would  very  naturally,  result,  had 
there  been  but  one,  with  a  weak  first  sense.  This  law 
is  found  to  prevail  in  almost  every  instance  of  regu- 
larly constructed  symbolic  composition  in  Scripture. 
The  existence  of  two  allegories,  with  one  second 
sense,  affords  most  effectual  aid  to  the  interpreter. 
It  has  evidently  a  similar  effect  in  the  elucidation  of 
the  allegorical  text,  only  greater  in  degree,  as  the  ex- 
istence of  a  double  copy  of  a  document  composed  in 
two  different  languages  has  in  clearing  up  the  diffi- 
culty in  the  sense  of  it. 

The  third  of  the  laws  we  have  mentioned,  the  law 
of  the  quaternal  structure,  or  the  law  in  virtue  of 
which  the  principal  agents  or  actors  in  the  allegory, 
are  four  in  number,  has  a  very  powerful  influence  in 
reducing  its  complexity.  However  long  and  com- 
plex the  allegory  may  be,  it  introduces  into  it  an 
effective  principle  of  order  and  system.  It  affords, 
even  in  a  greater  degree  than  the  two  other  laws,  a 
key  by  which  to  discover  and  a  touchstone  by  which 
to  test  the  plan  of  the  allegory. 

The  three  laws  in  comhination  may  be  regarded 
as  thoroughly  essential  at  once  to  the  discovery  and 
to  the  confirmation  of  the  plan  of  the  allegory.  It  is 
here  that  their  chief  value  lies.  But  without  the  plan 
the  interpreter  can  only  survey  a  few  outside  stones 
of  the  building ;  he  can  render  no  explanation  of  the 
interior  parts  of  the  edifice.  Xo  real  advancement 
whatever  can  be  made  in  the  interpretation  of  an 
allegory,  imtil  its_^Z<:m  be  discovered,  tested,  and  ap-' 


112  THE  FIEST   EEPEESENTATION. 

plied.  It  is  this  which  unfolds  the  relations  of  its  parts 
in  the  first  representation.  It  is  this  also  which  irre- 
vocably fixes  their  destiny  in  the  second  and  real 
representation. 

JN'ow  these  laws  are  very  plainly  developed  in  the 
prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  they  form,  as 
will  be  shown,  striking  features  of  its  symbolical  repre- 
sentation. Yet  it  cannot  be  said  that  their  bearing 
upon  the  Old  Testament  prophecies  is  of  much  value. 
These  are  for  the  most  part  interpreted,  and  where 
they  are  not,  the  allegory  is  in  itself  short,  and  the 
imagery  necessarily  void  of  complexity,  so  that,  what- 
ever necessity  there  may  be  for  the  interpretation  of 
its  sense,  there  is  little  need  for  any  methodical  ar- 
rangement of  its  constituents.  On  what  account,  then, 
have  these  laws  been  developed  so  systematically  as 
they  have  been  ;  for  they  have  been  systematically 
developed  ?  The  answer  is  obvious — for  the  sake 
of  the  Revelation  for  which  they  are  imperatively 
demanded.  This  prophecy  is  of  such  extreme  length, 
and  80  excessively  complex  in  comparison  with  all 
the  others,  that  it  stands  pre-eminently  in  need  of 
precisely  such  principles  as  those  above  referred  to, 
for  the  arrangement  of  its  multifarious  visions,  and 
for  the  reduction  of  its  complexity  into  that  state  of 
simplicity^  which  is  unquestionably,  in  a  long  array 
of  ideographic  signs,  as  here,  the  first  and  indispen- 
sable step  to  comprehension. 

These  principles  of  interpretation,  so  far  as  we  are 
aware,  have  not  yet  been  brought  to  bear  on  the 
Revelation. 


THE   FIKST   REPRESENTATION.  113 

Even  the  most  eminent  commentators  wlio  have 
expressly  written  long  treatises  on  it,  make  no  scruple 
of  violating  the  law  of  unity  of  design,  by  represent- 
ing it  as  delivered,  not  in  07ie  "  seven-sealed  book," 
but  in  this,  with  the  addition  of  "  the  little  book," 
(ch.  X.  2,)  in  the  form  of  an  appendix,  which  is  plainly 
a  conception  of  such  a  species  of  ^atcMoor'k  as  to  set 
the  laAV  utterly  at  defiance.  Is  a  symbolic  prophet, 
the  intelligibility  of  whose  composition  rests,  without 
doubt,  entirely  on  the  plan  and  design  which  charac- 
terize it,  to  be  supposed  to  have  made  so  faulty  and 
defective  an  arrangement  of  his  matter,  that  it  was 
necessary  to  add  an  appendix  ?  An  appendix,  from 
its  nature,  presupposes  a  deficiency  of  plan.  How 
then  can  it  be  supposed  to  exist  in  a  work  which  is 
based  on  plan?  And  how  palpable  a  violation  is 
there  here,  of  one  of  the  main  laws  of  symbolic  writ- 
ing !  We  make  no  reference  to  the  violation  of  this 
principle  in  other  respects,  of  which  almost  all  com- 
mentaries are  full.  Tlie  above  is  probably  the  most 
flagrant  violation  of  it,  and  is  sufficient  to  show  that 
the  principle  has  been  absolutely  contemned. 

There  is  not  any  interpreter  that  we  know  of,  that 
has  recognized  the  law  of  the  douUe  allegory.  This, 
so  far  as  we  know,  is  an  idea  that  is  now  mooted 
the  first  time  for  the  last  eighteen  hundred  years. 
Now  if  there  be  two  allegories,  and  not  one,  and  if 
there  has  been  supposed  to  be  one  instead  of  two,  it 
is  perfectly  obvious,  that  an  interpretation  upon  a 
theory  so  fundamentally  wrong,  is  a  sheer  impossi- 
bility.    At   the   same  time,  commentators  have  not 


114  THE   FIKST   KEPEESENTATIOIT. 

availed  themselves  of  one  of  the  most  effective  means 
of  illumination  which  was  in  their  power.  This,  how- 
ever, may  fairly  be  considered  as  a  damage  of  minor 
consequence,  in  comparison  with  the  other.  A  total 
absence  of  light  is  certainly  in  this  case  better  than  a 
false  light. 

As  for  the  quaternal  striccture^  we  do  not  suppose 
that  it  has  been  conceived  of  by  any  interpreter  as  a 
law  of  symbolic  prophecy  ;  and  apparently  it  has  not 
even  been  recognized  as  a  feature  of  it.  It  certainly 
has  never  been  applied  to  the  arrangement  of  the 
matter  and  to  the  apprehension  of  the  plan  and 
design  of  the  Eevelation. 

]^ow  if  these  laws  have  a  sure  foundation  in  sym- 
bolic writing,  as  will  be  shown,  it  is  obvious  that  all 
complaints  of  the  darkness  and  uncertainty  of  the 
prophecy,  are  as  yet  premature  and  groundless. 


CHAPTEK  YHI. 

LAW    OF   UNITY   t>F   DESIGN. 

This  law  of  symbolic  composition,  natm-ally  results 
from  that  principle  of  "  unity  of  idea,"  wliicli,  it  has 
been  shown,  is  an  essential  and  fundamental  principle 
of  the  allegory.  It  is  indispensable  to  the  intelli- 
gibility of  symbolic  representation,  and  there  is  not  a 
single  instance  of  an  infringement  of  it. 

1^0  epic,  tale,  or  composition  of  any  sort  develops 
this  principle  more  highly  than  these  prophecies  do. 
Each  of  them  forms  what  the  Germans  call  "  ein 
abgeschlossenes  ganze,"  which  may  be  translated 
literally  into  the  somewhat  uncouth  English  of  a  shut- 
off  whole.  Each  is  a  whole  complete  in  itself;  all 
foreign  elements,  every  thing  that  is  not  essentially 
connected  with  the  main  plot  and  design,  is  excluded, 
while  unity  of  j)lan  and  design  knits  the  several  parts 
of  the  composition  together  in  symmetry  of  form  and 
affinity  of  relationship,  and  impresses  upon  the  whole 
the  stamp  of  a  perfect  unity. 

The  Cosmos  of  the  material  creation  displays  this 
unity  of  design  ;  the  whole  revelation  which  God  has 
made  to  man,  and  which  has  not  improperly  been 


116  LAW   OF  UNITY   OF  DESIGN. 

denominated  His  second  creation  within  the  universe 
of  mind^  displays  it,  and  every  symbolic  comjDosition 
which  is  part  of  this  creation,  is  thoroughly  impregnat- 
ed with  it.  It  not  only  accords  with  the  unity  of  God's 
whole  design,  as  it  is  manifested  in  His  Word ;  it  ex- 
hibits for  itself  a  separate  and  independent  unity.  It 
is  a  miniaiure  unity  within  a  larger  imity.  This 
oneness  of  plan  and  design  is  indeed  the  '^;^to?  element 
of  the  symholiG  prophecy.  It  is  absolutely  requisite 
for  its  existence,  not  alone  as  an  inspired  revelation, 
but  even  as  a  legible  and  intelligible  communication. 

It  will  be  sufficient  to  throw  a  glance  on  one  or 
two  of  the  prophecies  of  Daniel  and  Zechariah,  to  see 
how  perfect  is  the  unity  of  design  which  characterizes 
the  compositions  of  these  prophets — specimens  of 
composition,  which  it  is  acknowledged  by  all,  must 
be  principally  held  in  view  in  the  interpretation  of 
the  Revelation.  This  book  is  undoubtedly  expressly 
grounded  upon  them,  not  only  as  to  style^  but  as  to 
actual  subject. 

The  prophecy  of  Daniel,  ch.  vii.,  shows  the  preva- 
lence of  this  principle  in  its  structure  and  composi- 
tion. The  prophet  here  predicts  concerning  four  em- 
pires represented  under  the  form  of  Four  Beasts.  He 
traces  the  history  of  these  from  their  rise  in  the  sea^ 
which  gives  them  origin,  to  their  dreadful  end  in  the 
hviYmug  flame.  He  keeps  them  separate  and  distinct 
from  the  power  which  procures  their  destruction.  He 
exhibits  also  the  principle  of  an  introduction  which, 
be  it  observed,  is  an  evident  mark  of  unity  of  design. 
It  necessarily  impresses  upon  the  work  to  which  it  is 


LAW   OF  UNITY   OF  DESIGN".  117 

prefixed  the  character  of  oneness.  The  introduction 
he  prefixes  is  the  folloAving :  Four  winds  strive  to- 
gether on  the  great  sea,  and,  as  a  result  of  the  tem- 
pest thus  occasioned,  four  beasts  arise,  lifting  them- 
selves up  among  the  swelling  billows,  or,  as  may  be 
conceived,  vomited  forth  upon  the  shore  by  their 
fury.  These  Avinds  which  perform  this  agency,  con- 
stitute no  part  of  the  prophecy,  as  appears  from  the 
interpretation  of  it.  Here  there  occurs  no  allusion  to 
the  winds.  Nor  can  this  representation  be  conceived 
to  form  any  part  of  the  prediction.  The  winds  indi- 
vidually are  plainly  incapable  of  representing  par- 
ticular subjects.  They  cannot  be  described,  nor  can 
they  therefore  bear  any  individual  signification.^ 
The  "  four  winds "  are  simply  employed,  as  is  evi- 
dent, to  constitute  an  exordium  or  introduction  to  the 
prophecy,  and  to  afford  a  representation  of  the  origin 
of  the  subjects  of  it.  In  this  introduction,  which  may 
be  regarded  as  undeveloped  and  little  more  than  in 
the  germ,  compared  with  the  introductions  of  John, 
who,  however,  undoubtedly  models  his  longer  and 
more  elaborate  specimens  upon  this  germ,  there  is  a 
plain  manifestation  of  unity  of  design.  The  root  is 
here  displayed  to  which  the  subject  of  the  pro- 
phecy are  traced.  They  have  a  common  origin,  and 
they  are  introduced.  Unity  of  design  is  thus  im- 
printed on  the  prophecy  twice,  by  the  representation 
made  by  the  introduction  and  b}^  the  origin. 

This  germinal  introduction  develops  nnity,  as 
well  as  beauty  of  design,  both  in  the  first  and  second 
sense  of  the  allegory. 


118  LAW   OF  UNITY   OF  DESIG^-. 

These  monsters  of  the  deep  arise  out  of  no  calm 
and  iinpertm'bed  sea.  It  takes  the  tempest,  formed 
by  four  winds,  which  meet  in  collision  and  lash  the 
sea  into  foam  and  fury,  to  bring  these  monsters  of 
the  deep  up  from  the  abyss.  They  are  monsters,  and 
in  tumult  they  arise  from  the  depths  of  ocean. 

The  same  unity  as  well  as  beauty  of  design  is 
apparent  in  the  second  sense.  Four  winds  are  all 
the  winds  of  heaven,  according  as  the  ancient  He- 
brews reckoned  them,  for  they  counted  only  four 
points  of  the  compass.  As  a  wind,  a  moving  force  in 
the  natural  heavens,  is  a  symbol  of  a  dominion,  a 
moving  power  in  the  political  firmament,  the  four 
winds  constitute  a  fitting  symbol  of  the  full  idea  of 
dominion.  They  are  a  suitable  symbol  of  dominion 
in  the  abstract  or  general.  The  number  four  is  in  har- 
mony with  and  is  an  evidence  of  this  appropriation 
of  the  symbol.  In  Scripture  four  is  the  number  of 
dominion.  There  is  accordingly  the  representation 
made  of  dominion  in  the  full  form  evolving  four  con- 
crete dominions.  Dominion,  tlien,  is  the  source  from 
whence  the  subject  takes  its  rise,  and  the  subject 
flows  on  in  one  stream  from  this  source  in  undisturbed 
unity.  The  four  dominions  of  which  it  consists  are, 
with  beautiful  consistency  of  design,  represented  as 
evolved  from  dominion. 

The  corresponding,  or  second  version  of  the  same 
prophecy,  ch.  ii.,  wants  the  feature  of  an  introduc- 
tion, the  composite  symbol  employed,  a  standing 
hnage^  not  admitting  of  it  in  any  natural  or  aesthetic 
manner.     The  conception,  however,   of  unity  in  the 


LAW   OF   UNITY   OF   DESIGN.  119 

subject,  is  just  as  distinctly  expressed  in  the  combi- 
nation of  the  symbols  of  the  four  dominions  into  one 
image,  the  different  parts  of  the  body  of  which,  form- 
ed of  different  substances,  represent  them  individ- 
ually, while  the  whole  image  places  them  before  the 
mind  in  composite  unity.  The  destroying  agent  is 
represented  in  consistency  with  unity  of  design,  as  a 
stone  taken  unquarried  from  the  mountains,  which 
falls  upon  and  breaks  into  pieces  this  image. 

In  the  prophecy  of  Zechariah,  ch.  vi.,  there  is  an 
even  more  striking  exemplification  of  the  same  law 
of  unity  of  design,  than  in  that  of  Daniel,  ch.  vii. 
Here  the  prophet  excludes  the  destroying  agent,  the 
kingdom  of  God,  of  whose  dominion,  nevertheless,  he 
predicts  in  other  places  from  the  representation  alto- 
gether, and  confines  himself  strictly  to  the  four  sub- 
jects whose  origin  he  depicts.  He  opens  his  prophecy 
with  an  introduction.  This  is  conceived  in  the  same 
spirit,  and  exhibits  the  same  features  as  that  of 
Daniel,  ch.  vii.  Four  chariots  are  represented  to 
issue  from  between  two  mountains  of  brass.  These 
mountains  form  no  jDart  of  the  prophecy,  as  appears 
from  the  interpretation,  which  makes  no  allusion  to 
them.  They  are  simply  placed  on  the  picture  for  the 
purpose  of  affording  an  original  to  the  chariots  which 
are  seen  issuing  forth  from  between  them.  The  pic- 
torial and  the  symbolical  ideas  as  here  expressed,  are 
the  same  as  in  Daniel.  Two  mountains  constitute  a 
perfect  image  for  the  purposes  of  the  prophet,  forming 
the  valley  from  which  the  chariots  are  represented  to 
issue  forth.     This  conception  gives  unity  as  well  as 


120  LAW   OF   UNITY   OF  DESIGN. 

beauty  of  design  to  the  pictorial  representation. 
The  same  features  are  observable  in  the  picture  view- 
ed symbolically.  The  second,  or  real  meaning  of 
mountain,  is  like  that  of  wind,  dominion.  In  two 
mountains,  then,  which  form,  as  it  has  been  seen,  a 
perfect  image  for  the  purposes  of  the  prophet,  there 
is  a  representation  of  dominion  in  the  full  or  perfect 
form.  The  force  of  the  representation  then  is,  four 
dominions  in  the  concrete  have  their  origin  in  do- 
minion in  the  abstract  or  general.  Dominion  in  the 
general  evolves  from  its  womb  four  dominions  in  the 
concrete.  There  is  thus  impressed  on  the  prophecy 
unity  of  design,  both  by  the  fact  itself  of  the  intro- 
duction, and  the  sense  which  this  introduction  bears, 
assigning,  namely  an  original  by  the  whole  subject. 

To  these,  many  instances  of  the  same  kind  might 
be  added.  But  those  above,  which  are  taken  from 
the  highest  specimens  of  the  art  of  Scriptural  symbolic 
painting,  are  sufficient  to  show  the  prevalence  of  the 
principle  of  unity  of  design  in  it. 

To  tlie  meaning  of  the  symbolic  prophecies,  there 
could  be  no  key  apart  from  the  exhibition  of  this  prin- 
ciple in  their  structure  and  composition.  Every  alle- 
gory consists  of  a  certain  number  of  parts,  which 
have  no  meaning  separately,  and  which  derive  all 
their  real  sense  from  the  perception  of  that  design,  in 
accordance  with  which  the  framer  disposed  them  so  as 
to  form  one  nnited,  harmonious,  and  thoroughly  con- 
sistent whole.  In  some  cases  this  design  is  at  once 
apparent ;  in  others,  it  must  be  sought  for.  The  inter- 
preter frequently  finds  the  parts  of  the  composition 


LAW   OF   UNITY   OF   DESIGN.  121 

disjointed  and  '"separate,  void  of  apparent  design,  and 
consequently  void  of  meaning  ;  in  the  same  state, 
indeed,  in  which  the  allegory  of  the  Revelation  is 
generally  conceived  to  be.  He  is  bound  to  search 
after  a  unity  of  design,  which  may  bring  all  the  dis- 
jointed parts  into  harmony,  consistency,  and  oneness 
of  purpose  and  design  ;  he  cannot  tail  to  find  such  a 
plan,  and  when  he  lias  found  it,  then,  but  not  till  then, 
is  he  in  a  position  to  interpret  the  piece.  He  then  can 
say :  "  See  you  have  now  the  meaning,  for  you  see 
the  design  of  the  author,  and  consequently  you  appre- 
hend his  meaning ;  in  his  design  lies  his  meaning ; 
the  parts  are  fitted  into  that  whole,  which  according 
to  the  scheme  in  his  mind,  they  were  intended  to 
form :  the  design  of  each  several  part,  and  by  conse- 
quence its  meaning  is  developed  in  the  discovery 
thus  made  of  the  design,  and  meaning  of  the  whole. 
This  rightly  describes  the  case.  The  design  of  the 
whole  being  perceived,  the  design  of  the  ]3arts  neces- 
sarily follows.  When  this  is  done,  the  meaning  of 
the  allegory  must  be  received,  and  it  is  received  as 
established,  nay,  as  demonstrated.  The  mind  seeks 
for  no  further  evidence.  The  design  of  the  piece 
being  perceived,  the  meaning  is  clearly  demonstrated, 
and  the  more  extended  and  more  complicated  the  de- 
sign is,  the  greater  and  the  higher  the  demonstration 
necessarily  is.  This  demonstration  may  justly  be  said 
to  reach  its  highest  point  in  the  Eevelation,  the  design 
of  which  is  profound  and  the  complexity  great. 

It  is  through  a  virtual  recognition  of  this  principle, 
as  at  once  the  key  and  the  proof  of  an  allegory,  that 
6 


122  LAW   OF  UNITY   OF  DESIGN. 

the  interpretation  of  these  in  Scripture,  as  soon  as 
they  are  submitted  to  the  mind,  act  upon  it  with 
the  force  of  demonstration.  In  these  the  parts  of  the 
prophecy  are  so  interpreted  as  in  their  combination 
to  constitute  a  unity  in  the  whole,  the  perception  of 
which  renders  the  meaning  self-evident.  Let  us  take 
an  example.  The  dreams  of  the  chief  butler  and 
baker  of  Pharaoh,  as  told  to  Joseph,  are  instances  of 
simple  symbolic  composition.  The  interpretation 
given  by  Joseph  affords  an  example  of  the  irresistible 
conviction  produced  upon  the  mind  when  the  perfect 
unity  of  design  which  pervades  the  compositions  is 
disclosed  to  it.  It  seeks  for  no  farther  evidence ;  it 
sees  at  once  this  Tmist  be  the  meaning,  and  appre- 
hends, in  the  discovered  unity  of  design  and  the  rela- 
tions it  establishes,  a  demonstration. 

Such  is  the  force  which  the  sense  of  a  well-sustained 
allegory  always  exerts  upon  the  mind.  It  speaks  to 
it  with  the  force  of  intuition.  It  does  this  whenever 
the  unity  of  its  design  has  been  unfolded  to  the  mind. 
It  is  then  felt  that  the  design  of  the  author  has  been 
apprehended,  and  the  irresistible  conviction  immedi- 
ately follows  that  his  meaning  is  known.  The  con- 
viction here  is  essentially  of  the  same  kind  as  that 
which  arises  when  the  design  of  words  has  been  ap- 
prehended. The  basis  of  this  conclusion  is  the  dis- 
covery of  design ;  but  in  an  allegory  this  is  always 
inseparable  from  unity. 

It  thus  appears  that  unity  of  design  is  a  funda- 
mental principle  which  must  exist,  and  does  exist,  in 
all  symbolic  composition.     We  have  called  it  a  laWy 


LAW   OF  UNITY   OF  DESIGN.  123 

but  it  is  evidently  more  of  the  nature  of  a  j^rinGijple^ 
and  admits  of  no  exceptions.  It  is  inherent  in  all 
symbolic  compositions,  and  must  exist  in  the  Revela- 
tion. It  has  not  hitherto  been  found  in  it ;  it  is  there- 
fore still  to  be  discovered  in  it. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE  LAW  OF  THE  DOUBLE  ALLEGOET. 

By  an  allegory  in  tlie  double  form,  is  meant  an 
allegory  in  wliicli  there  are  two  first  representations, 
separate  and  distinct  from  eacli  other,  both  of  which 
convey  one  and  the  same  second  sense.  Of  an  allegory 
of  this  kind,  the  parable  delivered  by  Christ  in  John  x. 
affords  an  example,  although  the  difference  is  very 
slight  between  the  two  versions.  It  is  twofold,  or 
there  are  two  parables  with  one  and  the  same  second 
sense.     The  first  is  thus  delivered  : 

"  He  that  entereth  not  by  the  door  into  the  sheep- 
fold,  but  climbeth  up  some  other  way,  the  same  is  a 
thief  and  a  robber." — Y.  1. 

This  is  one  parable  or  one-half  of  the  twofold 
parable  or  allegory. 

The  interpretation  of  it  is  given  thus  : 

"  I  am  the  door  of  the  sheep.  All  that  ever  came 
before  me  are  thieves  and  robbers  :  but  the  sheep  did 
not  hear  them.  I  am  the  door  :  by  me  if  any  man 
enter  in,  he  shall  be  saved,  and  shall  go  in  and  out, 
and  find  pasture.  The  thief  cometh  not,  but  for  to 
steal,  and  to  kill,  and  to  destroy  ;  I  am  come  that  they 


LAW  OF  THE  DOUBLE  ALLEGORY.        125 

might  have  life,  and  that  thej  might  have  it  more 
abundantly."— Ys.  7-10. 

The  parable  in  the  second  form  runs  thus  : 

"  He  that  entereth  in  by  the  door,  is  the  shepherd 
of  the  sheep.  To  him  the  porter  openeth ;  and  the 
sheep  hear  his  voice  ;  and  he  calleth  his  own  sheep 
by  name,  and  leadeth  them  out.  And  when  he  put- 
teth  forth  his  own  slieep,  he  goeth  before  them,  and 
the  sheep  follow  him :  for  they  know  his  voice.  And 
a  stranger  will  they  not  follow,  but  will  flee  from  him  ; 
for  they  know  not  the  voice  of  strangers." — Ys.  2-5. 

And  the  interpretation  of  it  is : 

"  I  am  the  good  shepherd :  the  good  shepherd 
giveth  his  life  for  the  sheep.  But  he  that  is  an  hire- 
ling, and  not  the  shepherd,  whose  own  the  sheep  are 
not,  seeth  the  wolf  coming,  and  leaveth  the  slieep, 
and  fleeth ;  and  the  wolf  catcheth  them,  and  scatter- 
eth  the  sheep.  The  hireling  fleeth,  because  he  is  an 
hireling,  and  careth  not  for  the  sheep.  I  am  the  good 
shepherd,  and  know  my  sJieej)-)  and  am  known  of 
mine.  As  the  Father  knoweth  me,  even  so  know  I 
the  Father :  and  I  lay  down  my  life  for  the  sheep. 
And  other  sheep  I  have,  which  are  not  of  this  fold : 
them  also  I  must  bring,  and  they  shall  hear  my  voice ; 
and  there  shall  be  one  fold,  and  one  sheplierd.  There- 
fore doth  my  Father  love  me,  because  I  lay  down  my 
life,  that  I  might  take  it  again.  No  man  taketh  it 
from  me,  but  I  lay  it  down  of  myself.  I  have  power 
to  lay  it  down,  and  I.  have  power  to  take  it  again. 
This  commandment  have  I  received  of  my  Father." — 
Ys.  11-18. 


126        LAW  OF  THE  DOUBLE  ALLEGORY. 

In  tlie  first,  the  Saviour  compares  himself  to  the 
door  of  the  sheepfold,  and  in  the  second  to  the  shepherd. 

It  is  unreasonable  to  expect  a  perfect  correspond- 
ence between  the  two  versions  of  snch  an  allegory. 
Two  allegories  perfectly  alike  are  inconceivable.  As 
there  must,  of  necessity,  be  some  points  of  difference 
in  the  first  representation  of  the  one,  compared  with 
the  other,  the  second  sense  will  naturally  undergo  a 
partial  modification.  It  is  sufficient  that  the  second 
sense  is  essentially  the  same. 

The  prophetic  allegories,  for  the  most  part,  ex- 
hibit this  feature  of  doubla  representation.  The  pro- 
phecy of  Daniel  regarding  the  four  empires  of  the 
world  is  delivered  in  the  form  of  a  double  allegory. 
In  the  first,  which  was  pictured  before  the  mental  eye 
of  l^ebuchadnezzar,  lost  by  him,  but  recovered  and 
interpreted  by  Daniel,  ch.  ii.  29-45,  there  is  a  repre- 
sentation of  a  great  Image,  consisting  of  Four  Metals, 
broken  to  pieces  by  a  stone,  cut  out  without  hands, 
which  stone,  after  destroying  the  image,  becomes  a 
mountain  and  fills  the  w^hole  earth.  Here  is  one  al- 
legory. The  same  prophecy  is  redelivered  in  the 
form  of  another  to  Daniel  himself,  ch.  vii.  In  this, 
the  representation  is  made  of  Four  Beasts,  which  are 
described  from  their  rise  in  the  sea  till  their  end  in 
the  burning  flame,  when  the  kingdom  "  is  given  to  the 
people  of  the  saints  of  the  Most  High,"  or  when,  in 
the  words  of  the  interpretation  of  the  first  allegory, 
''  the  God  of  Heaven  shall  set  up  a  kingdom  that  shall 
never  be  destroyed."  Each  of  these  allegories,  contain- 
ing distinct  and  totally  difi'erent  first  representations, 


LAW  OF  THE  DOUBLE  ALLEGORY.        127 

develops,  as  the  interpretations  sliow,  the  same  second 
sense.  One  prophecy  is  delivered  which  respects  the 
four  great  world-empires,  tlie  destruction  of  these  and 
the  establishment,  on  their  ruins,  of  God's  universal 
kingdom. 

In  Zechariah,  ch.  i.,  there  occurs  the  following 
example  of  one  prediction  delivered  in  two  allego- 
ries, or,  as  it  may  be  called,  a  double  allegory.  In 
the  one,  the  prophet  sees  a  horseman  upon  a  red 
horse,  standing  among  the  myrtle  trees,  which  is  fol- 
lowed by  red  horses,  speckled  and  white.  This  is 
one  allegorical  picture,  which,  as  appears  from  the 
context,  predicts  the  restoration  of  the  Jews.  This  is 
followed  by  a  second,  in  which  "  four  horns  "  appear, 
which  are  said  to  have  scattered  Judah,  Israel,  and 
Jerusalem,  and  "four  carpenters,"  which  come  to  cast 
out  the  horns  of  the  Gen  tiles  "  which  lifted  up  their 
horn  over  the  land  of  Judah  to  scatter  it."  There  is 
thus  the  same  prediction  delivered  in  this  twofold  and 
reduplicating  form  which  the  structure  of  the  compo- 
sition manifests,  as  the  partial  interj^retations  rendered 
and  the  context  show.  In  the  first  allegory,  the  Jewish 
restoration  is  not  ]-epresented  with  equal  fulness,  but 
it  is  distinctly  unfolded  in  the  words,  to  be  taken  liter- 
ally, which  immediately  follow.  "  Then  the  angel  of 
the  Lord  answered  and  said,  O  Lord  of  hosts,  how  long 
wilt  thou  not  have  mercy  on  Jerusalem  and  on  the 
cities  of  Judah,  against  which  thou  hast  had  indigna- 
tion these  threescore  and  ten  years  ?  And  the  Lord 
answered  the  angel  that  talked  with  me  with  good 
words  and  comfortable  words.      So  the  angel  that 


128        LAW  OF  THE  DOUBLE  ALLEGOEY. 

communed  with  me  said  unto  me,  Cry  tliou,  saying, 
Thus  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts :  I  am  jealous  for  Jeru- 
salem and  for  Zion  with  a  great  jealousy.  And  I  am 
very  sore  displeased  with  the  heathen  that  are  at  ease : 
for  I  was  but  a  little  displeased,  and  they  helped  for- 
ward the  affliction.  Therefore  thus  saith  the  Lord ; 
I  am  returned  to  Jerusalem  with  mercies  ;  my  house 
shall  be  bnilt  in  it,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts ;  and  a  line 
shall  be  stretched  forth  upon  Jerusalem.  Cry  yet, 
saying.  Thus  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts :  My  cities 
through  prosperity  shall  yet  be  spread  abroad  ;  and 
the  Lord  shall  yet  comfort  Zion,  and  shall  yet  choose 
Jerusalem." — Ys.  12-17.  In  the  second  allegoric  pic- 
ture, which,  in  this  case,  immediately  follows  the 
first,  the  restoration  is  brought  out  in  strong  and  lively 
colors  by  the  representation  of  four  carpenters  or 
huilders  fraying  the  four  horns  that  scattered  Judah. 
The  meaning  of  both  is  explained.  It  is  apparent 
that,  with  two  totally  different  first  senses,  the  second 
sense  is  the  same.  The  prediction  is  a  manifest  ex- 
ample of  double  allegorical  representation. 

The  prophecy  of  the  four  chariots,  ch.  vi.,  may  be 
regarded  as  delivered  only  in  the  form  of  a  single  al- 
legory. It  is,  however,  the  onlj^  example  of  the  kind 
which  occurs  in  the  thoroughly  symbolic  prophecies 
of  the  Old  Testament.  We  exclude  from  present  con- 
sideration Daniel's  prophecy,  ch.  viii.,  for  a  reason 
which  will  be  afterwards  stated.  Yet,  even  here,  the 
nucleus  of  a  second  allegory  may  be  discovered  in 
the  interpretation.  This  says,  "These  are  the  four 
spirits  of  the  heavens  (or,  better,  as  the  marginal  read- 


LAW  OF  THE  DOUBLE  ALLEGORY.        129 

ing  has  it,  these  are  the  four  winds  of  the  heavens) 
which  go  forth  from  standing  before  the  Lord  of  all 
the  earth."  The  angel  here  delivers  the  interpretation 
in  the  form  of  a  new  representation  of  "  four  winds 
of  the  heavens,"  which  words  cannot  possibly  be  un- 
derstood literally,  and  which  may  therefore  be  re- 
garded as  forming  at  least  the  nucleus  of  a  new  alle- 
gory. It  is  true  the  angel  immediately  lays  the  sym- 
bol aside,  and  takes  up  the  former  one  of  the  chariots 
and  horses,  or  rather,  of  the  horses,  for  he  makes  no 
allusion  to  the  chariots.  But,  in  his  words  from  vs.  5 
to  8,  he,  in  every  respect,  redelivers  the  prediction, 
stating  it  ^vith  greater  detail.  This,  be  it  observed,  is 
not  an  unusual  feature  of  the  repetition.  See  ch.  i., 
Dan.  ii.  and  vii.,  and  Gen.  xxxvii.  6-9.  Whether  this 
be  accepted  as  a  case  of  double  representation  or  not, 
it  is  unquestionable  that  the  whole  of  the  angel's  an- 
swer to  the  question  of  Zechariah,  "  What  are  these, 
my  lord  ? "  is  couched  in  hieroglyphic  language,  and 
forms,  in  effect,  a  second  and  more  full  symbolical 
representation.  Had  the  angel  followed  out  the  sym- 
bol of  "  the  winds,"  instead  of  reverting  to  the  horses, 
his  words  would  really  have  formed  the  second  alle- 
gory. It  is  obvious,  that  the  winds  cannot  be  de- 
scribed or  individualized,  and,  it  may  be  concluded 
with  sufficient  pi'obability,  that  for  this  reason  the 
symbol  was  laid  aside.  As  it  is,  this  instance  is  to 
be  held  a  redelivery,  or  a  double  version,  with  the 
same  allegory,  while  there  is  a  partial  development 
of  a  second. 

What  is  to  be  regarded  as  the  first  regularly  con- 
6* 


130        LAW  OF  THE  DOUBLE  ALLEGORY. 

stnicted  symbolic  prophecy  in  sacred  writ  exhibits 
the  form  of  a  double  allegory.  The  earliest  specimen 
of  the  art,  that  which,  in  respect  of  antiquity,  stands 
at  the  head  of  the  list,  and  is  the  forerunner  of  suc- 
cessors extending  through  a  long  series  of  ages,  ex- 
hibits the  double  form.  The  antiquity  of  this  exam- 
ple, as  well  as  of  another,  to  which  reference  will 
immediately  be  made,  is  im23ortant,  inasmuch  as  it 
shows  that  duplication  is  a  fundamental  principle, 
and  not  a  mere  after-development  of  the  art.  We  re- 
fer to  the  prophecy  delivered  to  the  youthful  Joseph, 
regarding  his  future  greatness.  Joseph  tells  to  his 
brethren  his  first  dream  thus  : 

"  For  behold,  we  were  binding  sheaves  in  the 
field,  and  lo,  my  sheaf  arose,  and  also  stood  upright ; 
and  behold,  your  sheaves  stood  round  about,  and 
made  obeisance  to  my  sheaf." — Gen.  xxxvii.  T. 

He  dreams  a  second  dream,  and  relates  it  thus : 

"  Behold,  I  have  dreamed  a  dream  more :  and 
behold,  the  sun  and  the  moon  and  the  eleven  stars 
made  obeisance  to  me." — v.  9. 

Here,  in  the  two  allegories,  with  a  slight  addition 
in  the  second,  07ie  prediction  is  delivered,  viz.,  that 
of  Joseph's  exaltation  in  worldl}^  rank  above  his  kin- 
dred. It  forms  a  very  neat  and  compact  specimen  of 
the  double  allegory  ;  in  the  first  version  of  it,  the 
sheaves  of  corn  do  obeisance  to  Joseph's  sheaf;  in 
the  second,  the  sun,  the  moon,  and  the  eleven  stars, 
perform  to  him  obeisance.  It  is  one  prophecy  de- 
livered in  two  sets  of  symbols,  which  have  a  totally 


LAW  OF  TKE  DOUBLE  ALLEGOKY.        131 

different  first  sense,  but  of  wliicli  the  second  sense  is 
precisely  the  same. 

The  above  examples,  which  comprehend  almost 
the  whole  of  the  fully  developed  and  regularly  con- 
structed symbolic  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament, 
with  two  exceptions,  one  of  which  enforces  the  rule, 
and  which  will  both  be  considered  presently,  may 
be  regarded  as  sufficient  to  establish  the  conclusion, 
that  the  normal  form  of  a  symbolic  prophecy  is  two 
first  representations  hearing  one  second  sense.  If  the 
prophecy  of  the  four  chariots  of  Zechariah  be  regarded 
as  constructed  in  the  single  form,  it  will  simply  be  an 
exception  to  the  rule.  The  prophecy  of  IJaniel,  ch. 
viii.,  is  necessarily  excluded  from  the  operation  of 
the  law,  for  a  special  reason,  which  will  be  stated 
immediately. 

But  the  following  prediction,  which,  on  account 
of  its  very  important  bearing  on  the  law,  we  have  re- 
served to  the  end  of  the  catalogue,  is  not  only  an  emi- 
nent example  of  its  operation,  but  it  may  be  regarded 
as  laying  down  the  law  itself  while  it  states  the  rea- 
sons for  it.  There  is  thus  the  law  established  by  a 
series  of  precedents,  and  there  is  also  a  distinct  enun- 
ciation and  promulgation  of  it.  The  prediction  in 
question,  is  that  delivered  to  Pharaoh,  concerning  tlie 
seven  years'  famine  in  Egypt.  It  is  delivered  in  two 
dream-allegories  to  Pharaoh.  The  Egyptian  king  re- 
lates the  first  thus : 

"  In  my  dream,  behold,  I  stood  upon  the  bank  of 
the  river  ;  And  behold,  there  came  up  out  of  the  river 
seven  kine,  fat-fleshed,  and  well-favoured  ;  and  they 


132        LAW  OF  THE  DOUBLE  ALLEGOET. 

fed  in  a  meadow:  And  behold,  seven  other  kine 
came  up  after  them,  poor,  and  very  ill-favoured,  and 
lean-tleshed,  such  as  I  never  saw  in  all  the  land  of 
Egypt  for  badness  :  And  the  lean  and  the  ill-favoured 
kine  did  eat  up  the  first  seven  fat  kine :  And  when 
they  had  eaten  them  up,  it  could  not  be  known  that 
they  had  eaten  them ;  but  they  were  still  ill-favoured, 
as  at  the  beginning.  So  I  awoke." — Gen.  xli.  17- 
21. 

He  relates  the  second  thus  : 

"  And  I  saw  in  my  dream,  and  behold,  seven  ears 
came  up  in  one  stalk,  full  and  good :  And  behold, 
seven  ears,  withered,  thin,  and  blasted  with  the  east 
wind,  sprung  up  after  them:  And  the  thin  ears 
devoured  the  seven  good  ears." — vs.  22-24. 

Upon  hearing  this  account  of  his  dreams,  "  Joseph 
said  unto  Pharaoh,  The  dream  of  Pharaoh  is  one," 
that  is,  as  is  plainly  the  meaning,  the  two  dreams  of 
Pharaoh  have  one  second  or  real  sense,  and  consti- 
tute one  divine  revelation.  The  sense  is  very  evi- 
dently this.  But  what  follows  has  a  most  important 
bearing  upon  the  subject  in  hand:  "  God  hath  showed 
Pharaoh  what  he  is  about  to  do."  The  connection  of 
the  words  plainly  shows  the  meaning  to  be,  that  a 
double  representation  with  one  sense,  is  a  sign  of  a 
divine  communication.  This,  however,  is  still  more 
plainly  stated  in  the  words,  with  which  Joseph  con- 
cludes his  interpretation  of  this  twofold  allegory,  sub- 
mitted to  the  mental  eye  of  Pharaoh,  where  a  farther 
reason  for  the  douhleness  is  added.  He  there  says : 
"  And  for  that  the  dream  was  doubled  unto  Pharaoh 


LAW  OF  THE  DOUBLE  ALLEGORY.        133 

twice;  it  is  because  the  thing  is  established  by  God, 
and  God  will  shortly  bring  it  to  pass." — v.  32.  The 
two  statements  lay  down  the  law  upon  the  subject  in 
terms  which  appear  to  be  very  express,  that  the  douhle- 
ness  of  symbolical  representation  is  a  sign  of  two 
things,  which  are,  first,  the  certainty  of  the  events 
predicted  happening ;  and,  secondly,  their  shortly 
happening.  The  latter  element,  indeed,  that  of  the 
sjjecdiness  of  the  fulfilment,  is  not  insisted  on,  since  it 
is  but  once  mentioned  ;  the  certainty  that  the  pre- 
diction will  be  fulfilled  is  insisted  on.  It  is  singly 
stated  in  the  first  instance ;  it  is  re-stated,  and  it  is 
evidently  the  main  thing  prefigured,  by  the  sign  of 
reduplication.  Now,  as  it  must  be  held,  that  all  the 
predictions  of  God  are  certain  of  being  fulfilled,  it 
follows  that  the  full  and  perfect  form  of  a  symbolic 
prophecy  is  the  double  form,  since  this  form  is  the 
sign  of  certainty.  It  follows  evidently,  also,  that  a 
symbolic  prophecy,  delivered  in  the  single  form, 
wants  the  sign  of  a  divine  communication.  Had  the 
above  prophecy  been  delivered  to  Pharaoh  in  the 
form  of  a  single  allegory,  it  is  plain  that  Joseph  could 
not  have  said,  "  God  hath  showed  Pharaoh  what  he  is 
about  to  do,"  since  he  grounds  this  statement  upon 
the  doubleness  of  the  dream.  Doubleness  of  repre- 
sentation is  asserted  to  be  the  sign  of  two  qualities  in 
a  prediction,  certainty  and  speediness  of  fulfilment. 
No  prediction  of  God  can  want  the  former  ;  it  may, 
however,  want  the  latter.  In  this  case,  but  in  this 
case  alone,  the  sign  would  evidently  be  inappropriate 
and  out  of  place.     Here  its  absence  may  not  only  be 


134:        LAW  OF  THE  DOrBLE  ALLEGOKY. 

regarded  as  jnstijSable,  but  it  may  be  looked  upon  as 
demanded,  on  tlie  ground  that  the  prophecy  does  not 
contain  one  of  the  two  things  of  which  "  doubleness  " 
is  the  sign,  to  wit,  sjpeediness  of  fulfilment. 

There  is  but  one  symbolic  prediction  of  Scripture, 
the  fulfilment  of  which  is  referred  to  a  distant  date. 
This  is  that  which  appears  in  Daniel,  ch.  viii.  With 
regard  to  this,  the  interpreting  angel,  at  various 
23oints,  insists  that  it  shall  be  late  in  the  accomplish- 
ment. This  prediction  exhibits  no  trace  of  double 
representation.  It  is  delivered  strictly  in  the  form 
of  a  single  allegory.  It  is  true,  it  is  re-delivered  in 
chaps,  xi.  and  xii.,  but  it  is  not  couched  there  in  the 
allegoric  form;  there  is  no  double  allegoric  repre- 
sentation of  it,  which  alone  could  give  it  the  character 
of  a  reduplicated  allegory. 

The  absence  here  of  the  second  allegory  is  suffi- 
ciently accounted  for,  by  the  reason  that  the  prophecy 
is  "  for  many  days,"  while  doubleness,  that  is,  as  must 
be  understood,  doubleness  in  the  allegorical  repre- 
sentation, is  stated  by  Joseph  to  be  a  sign  of  events 
that  will  shortly  come  to  pass.  It  might  have  double- 
ness, indeed,  on  the  ground  of  its  being  the  sign  of 
certainty  of  fulfilment ;  but  it  is  clear  it  is  better 
without  it,  in  order  to  preserve  the  perspicuity  of  the 
sign. 

The  law  is  thus  expressly  stated,  and  the  operation 
of  it  is  proved  by  many  examples.  We  find  that 
almost  all  the  symbolic  prophecies  bear  that  sign,  of 
being  communications  from  God,  which  lies  in  the 
doubleness  of  representation.     The  duplication,  how- 


LAW  OF  THE  DOUBLE  ALLEGORY.        135 

ever,  is  a  sign  of  speediness  as  well  as  certainty  of 
fullilment.  There  is  a  manifest  conlirmation  of  the 
law  in  this  respect  also,  in  the  very  exception,  inas- 
mnch  as  the  single  S3anbolic  prophecy  of  Scripture, 
which  bears  on  the  record  the  affirmation  that  the 
fullilment  will  be  late,  and  "  at  the  time  of  the  end," 
V.  IT,  is  destitute  of  the  feature  of  reduplication. 

It  may  be  considered  a  legitimate  conclusion  from 
the  above  that  every  regularly  constructed  symbolic 
prophecy  will  manifest  reduplication  and  display  a 
double  allegory,  provided  it  be  free  from  the  state- 
ment that  it  will  be  late  of  fulfilment.  It  may,  in- 
deed, be  late  of  fulfilment,  but  it  ought  to  be  free 
from  a  statement  to  this  effect,  in  which  case  the 
reduplication  in  it  will  be  solely  the  sign  of  certainty. 
It  may  be  regarded  as  certain  that  if  it  contains  the 
affirmation  in  it  that  the  events  will  shortly  come  to 
pass,  it  will  bear  the  sign  of  this  feature  of  its  events, 
which  is  reduplication.  If  it  wants  the  presence  of 
this  sign,  it  is  plainly  imperfect  in  form. 

But  the  Revelation  is  a  regularly  constructed 
symbolic  prophecy,  and,  as  is  universally  admitted, 
is  the  highest  specimen  of  the  art  of  writing  to  which 
it  belongs.  The  events  of  which  it  predicts  are 
"  certainly  established  by  God,"  and  it  is  affirmed  of 
them  with  frequent  repetition,  that  they  will  "  shortly 
come  to  pass,"  (i.  1,  3,)  etc.  It  is  the  only  prophecy, 
witli  the  exception  of  the  above,  which  enunciated 
the  reasons  of  the  law,  that  makes  a  formal  state- 
ment in  regard  to  the  events  shortly  coming  to  pass. 
It    thus    contains   in    the   highest   degree   the   two 


136  LAW  of"  the  double  allegoet. 

qualities,  of  whicli  donbleness  is  the  sign.  Can  it 
be  held  that  it  contains  the  two  things  signihed, 
and  that  it  is  destitute  of  the  sign  itself?  This  is  an 
inference  which  cannot  be  made.  The  unity  of  de- 
sign in  form,  as  well  as  in  subject,  which  is  known  to 
prevail,  and  which  must  prevail  in  s/mbolic  compo- 
sition, forbids  the  supposition  that  a  fundamental  law 
is  contravened,  and  that  the  signification  of  a  sign, 
which  is  well  established,  is  overthrown.  A  conclu- 
sion so  ruinous  to  the  consistenc}^  and  intelligibility 
of  symbolic  composition  cannot  be  held.  As  a  proph- 
ecy, the  Revelation  is  more  addicted  to  forms  than 
all  the  others,  as  is  universally  admitted.  But  the 
forms  which  it  observes  are  those  of  symbolic  Scrip- 
ture, among  which  the  reduplication  of  the  allegory 
holds  not  only  a  prominent  place,  but  the  highest 
place  of  all. 

It  is  a  legitimate,  nay,  a  necessary  conclusion, 
then,  that  the  prophecy  of  John  bears  that  signet  of 
divinity  attached  to  it,  which  consists  in  the  duplica- 
tion of  the  allegory,  and  that,  the  events  predicted  in 
it  being  such  as  will  shortly  come  to  pass,  it  has  the 
authoritative  sign  of  this  quality  of  its  events,  which 
sign  is  redi(/plication.  If  the  Revelation  does  not  de- 
liver a  double  allegory,  it  clearly  is  not  only  imjMV- 
fect^  but  positively  anomalous  in  form.  This  is  a 
conclusion  not  to  be  drawn. 


CHAPTEE  X. 

THE   LAW   OF   THE   QUATEENAL    STKUCTrEE,  OR   THE 
rOUKFOLD   FOKM. 

The  symbolic  prophets  construct  tlieir  allegories 
with  a  group  of  four  figures,  or  with  four  agents  or 
actors  in  their  plot,  which  plot,  although  in  the  Rev- 
elation complicated,  is,  for  the  most  part,  a  simple 
one.  This  is  a  nearly  universal  feature  of  symboHc 
composition.  It  is  not  of  essential  moment  to  know 
the  rationale  of  it ;  it  may  be  held  sufficient  to  rec- 
ognize the  fact  of  its  existence.  The  reason,  how- 
ever, on  which  it  is  grounded,  aj)pears  to  be  the  fol- 
lowing : 

The  natural  heaven  stands  in  symbolic  concejDtion 
for  what  is  called,  to  use  an  expression  borrowed 
from  its  own  style  of  representation,  the  2>olitiGal  fir- 
mnatnent.  The  winds,  the  moving  forces  in  the 
natural  heaven,  are  four  in  number,  as  they  were 
reckoned  by  the  Hebrews.  Now  as  the  natural 
heaven  has  four  agents,  for  the  winds  are  its  agents, 
it  is  only  maintaining  the  consistency  of  the  image 
to  represent  the  political  heaven  with  four  active 
powers  in  it.  This  fourfold  division  of  the  powers 
of  the  natural  heavens  is,  without  doubt,  the  funda- 


138         LAW  OF  THE  FOUEFOLD  FORM. 

meutal  fact  iq^on  wliicli  the  qiiaternal  structure  of 
tlie  prophetic  allegory  is  based. 

In  Zechariah,  ch.  vi.,  we  find  a  direct  reference  to 
the  winds  in  this  sense  of  agents,  not,  however,  in  the 
natural  but  in  the  political  world.  In  his  prediction 
of  the  Four  Chariots,  ch.  vi.,  which  unquestionably 
represent  the  four  great,  world-empires  of  Daniel,  the 
angel  interpreting  the  chariots  by  another  symbol, 
says  :  "  These  are  the  four  spirits  {i.  e.^  winds,  for  the 
Hebrew  word  nn  signifies  either  '  wind  '  or  '  sj^irit,' 
and  the  sense  here  certainly  requires  winds)  of  the 
heaven  which  go  forth  from  standing  before  the 
Lord  of  all  the  earth,"  that  is  in  efi'ect,  for  the  mean- 
ing can  be  nothing  else  :  these  are  the  four  dominions 
of  the  political  world  which  exist  under  the  provi- 
dence of  God  and  fulfil  his  purposes,  even  as  the 
winds  move  and  blow  upon  the  earth.  It  is  a  matter 
well  worthy  of  attention  that  the  same  symbol  which 
is  employed  to  close  this  prophecy  of  Zechariah  is 
emploj^ed  to  o]?en  the  precisely  corresponding  one 
of  Daniel,  ch.  vii.  This  prophet  says  :  "  I  saw  in  my 
vision  by  night,  and  behold  the  four  winds  of  the 
heaven  strove  upon  the  great  sea.  And  four  great 
beasts  came  up  from  the  sea,  diverse  one  from 
another,"  vs.  1,  2.  The  two  prophecies  thus  describe, 
in  so  far  as  the  symbol  is  concerned,  a  perfect  circle, 
the  one  prophecy  commencing  and  the  other  ter- 
minating with  the  same  s3^mbol,  wliich  correspond- 
ence, on  the  ground  of  that  unity  of  conception  which 
j)ervades  symbolic  composition,  may  justly  be  held 
to  be  evidence  of  their  unity  in  subject.     This  circle, 


LAW   OF   THE   FOTJEFOLD   FOEM.  139 

whicli  is  thus  performed  by  the  common  symbol, 
may  also  be  lielcl  to  enclose  and  to  consecrate  foiii\ 
the  central  point  in  the  representation,  as  the  spe- 
cial number  of  dominion^  since  this  is  the  subject 
here  in  hand.  There  can  be  little  doubt,  indeed, 
that  one,  if  not  the  sole  reason,  for  this  association, 
which  is  a  very  marked  one  throughout  Scripture,  of 
''  four"  with  dominion,  lies  in  the  fact,  that  the  winds 
of  the  heaven  are/bz^r. 

Daniel  casts  his  two  prophecies  or  rather  his  double 
proj^hecy  of  the  Four  Empires  in  the  fourfold  form, 
chs.  ii.  and  vii.  It  cannot  be  said  that  this  quaternal 
structure  whicli  he  has  given  to  it,  rests  on  the  fact 
that  the  empires  are  four.  The  number  of  the  do- 
minions is  in  truth  ^yq.  Yet  he  constructs  his 
prophecy  with  a  four-fold  group  in  it,  and  he  keeps 
the  fifth  dominion  separate  and  distinct  from  iliQ  four. 
He  thus  preserves  the  quaternal  form.  It  cannot  be 
said  that  this  disposition  of  his  subject  is  made  for  the 
reason  that  the  fifth  dominion  is  of  a  difierent  character 
from  the  preceding  four ;  that  it-  is  the  kingdom  of 
God,  while  the  four  are  world-dominions.  John,  who 
is  also  a  prophet  of  God,  and  with  whom  this  reason, 
had  it  really  existed,  must  have  weighed,  represents 
dominions  that  are  antagonistic  and  hostile  to  the 
Kingdom  of  God  with  the  very  same  kind  of  symbols 
and  combined  with  it  in  the  same  group.  Thus  he 
represents  the  false  ecclesiastical  dominion  of  his 
book  by  a  wliore^  the  true  church  by  a  woman,  the 
false  church  by  a  false  jyrophet,  the  true  church  by 
two  witnesses,  the  false  church  by  a  two-horned  wild 


140         LAW  OF  THE  FOUEFOLD  FOEM. 

heast^  the  true  clinrch  by  a  laiiib^  the  false  church  by 
the  city  Babylon^  the  true  church  by  the  New  Jeru- 
salem^  and  the  kingdom  of  God  triumphant,  claiming 
and  achieving  universal  temporal  authority  on  earth, 
in  accordance  with  Dan.  vii.  27,  by  a  horseman 
on  a  white  horse  ;  he  gains  a  complete  victory  over 
three  enemies,  whom  he  casts  into  a  lake  of  fire  ; 
these  are  rejDresented  by  the  second,  third,  and  fourth 
horsemen^  and  by  the  dragon^  least,  and  false  prophet. 
It  is  evident,  then,  that  John  mixes  up  the  kingdom 
of  God  with  the  world-dominions.  It  thus  appears 
that  Daniel's  modelling  his  prophecy  in  the  fourfold 
form  cannot  arise  from  the  fact  that  his  dominions 
are  four,  for  they  are  really  five.  Yet  he  so  manages 
his  representation  of  the  five  by  placing  the  fifth, 
which  he  does  not  even  name  XXiq  fifth,  externally  to 
the  fourfold  group,  that  he  preserves  in  efifect  the 
fourfold  structure  of  his  prophecy.  We  can  hardly 
regard  this  handling  of  his  subject  in  any  other  light 
than  as  evidence  that  the  fourfold  is  the  normal  form 
of  representing  the  subject.  The  structure  of  his 
prophec}'',  as  we  find  it,  appears  totally  inexplicable, 
except  on  the  ground  of  a  rigid  adherence  on  his 
part  to  the.quaternal  as  the  normal  mode  of  represen- 
tation. 

Zechariah,  however,  gives  a  more  striking  exem- 
plification of  Quaternal  Structure  in  his  prophecy, 
eh.  vi.,  above  referred  to,  and  which  we  have  every 
reason  to  regard  as  delivering  the  same  prediction  as 
that  of  Daniel  just  considered.  He  constructs  his 
prediction  in  such  a  way  that  not  a  breath  of  sus- 


LAW  OF  THE  FOUEFOLD  FOKM.         141 

picion  can  be  cast  on  the  purity  of  its  qnaternal  form. 
He  confines  liis  allegory  to  four  chariots,  and  predicts 
solely  of  the  four  great  world-empires.  He  excludes 
the  kingdom  of  God  from  the  representation  which  he 
here  makes  altogether,  although  he  predicts  largely 
of  this  kingdom  in  other  places.  Why  does  he  leave 
it  out  of  the  representation  here  ?  It  will  be  difficult 
to  find  any  other  reason  for  his  doing  this,  and  it  is 
to  be  presumed  that  he  had  a  reason,  except  that  the 
fourfold  is  the  normal  form  of  representation. 

In  the  double  allegory  which  Zechariah  delivers 
in  ch.  i.,  he  displays  the  quaternal  form  twice  over, 
although  there  appears  to  be  no  other  reason  for  his 
adoption  of  this  form  except  that  it  is  the  normal  one. 
It  is  true,  that  in  the  first  allegory  the  horses  are  not 
enumerated,  and  their  number  can  only  be  inferred. 
Still,  the  conclusion  is  a  legitimate  one,  that  the  qua- 
ternal  number  is  preserved  here  also,  since  in  the 
second  copy  of  the  prediction  which  he  delivers  below 
it  is  found.  "We  shall  not,  for  this  reason,  however, 
found  any  argument  upon  it.  But  in  the  second  alle- 
gory which  follows,  we  find  the  fourfold  structure  in 
a  distinct  form  accompanied  by  the  reduplication  of 
it.  The  political  joower  hostile  to  the  kingdom  of  God 
is  represented  by  four  horns ^  and  the  Jewish  nation 
by  four  carjyenters^  and  the  one  quaternary  is  placed 
in  opposition  to  the  other,  the  first  representing  the 
enemy  of  the  kingdom  of  God  oppressing  it,  by  en- 
deavoring to  prevent  the  restoration  of  the  Jews,  as  the 
interpretation  clearly  shows,  v.  19,  and  the  second  rep- 
resenting this  kingdom  triumphing  over  the  hostility. 


142         LAW  OF  THE  FOUEFOLD  FORM. 

"What  reason  can  there  be  here  for  determining  the 
representation  of  the  hostile  power  as  fourfold^  and 
the  Jewish  nation  as  fourfold^  except  that  which  is 
founded  in  the  prevalence  of  the  law  of  the  quater- 
nary ?  The  quaternary,  it  is  true,  is  a  double  one,  but 
this  results  from  the  nature  of  the  prediction.  The 
dominions  of  which  the  prophet  had  to  predict  were 
two  in  number.  Had  he  represented  these  in  a  sin- 
gle form,  he  would  have  violated  the  law  of  the  qua- 
ternal  structure  ;  had  he  represented  each  of  them  by 
the  number  2,  he  would  have  still  broken  it ;  by  rep- 
resenting them  by  4,  he  preserves  the  quaternal  prin- 
ciple entire  and  unbroken.  The  operation  of  the  law, 
then,  is,  in  this  prophecy,  not  only  very  distinctly 
perceptible,  but,  as  it  appears,  its  influence  has  ac- 
tually wrested  the  representation  into  the  quaternal 
form. 

The  prophecy  of  Daniel,  ch.  viii.,  exhibits  a  double 
quaternary  likewise.  The  symbols  here  are  eight 
horns,  which  are  thus  made  up,  2  horns  upon  the  ram, 
1  upon  the  he-goat,  4  which  spring  up  out  of  it,  and 
a  little  one  which  makes  the  eighth.  It  can  hardly 
be  said  that  the  subject  has  determined  this  number  ; 
we  are  much  rather  justified  in  saying,  that  the  num- 
her^  on  the  ground  of  its  prevalence,  has  determined 
the  sicbject,  and  that  the  dominions  predicted  of  are 
eight,  because  eight  forms  a  double  quaternary. 

A  glance  thrown  upon  the  Revelation  will  be  suf- 
ficient to  discover  the  prevalence  of  the  quaternary  in 
it.  Thus  the  four  living  creatures  call  npon  the 
prophet  to  "  Come  and  see  "  four  horsemen,  ch.  vi. 


LAW  OF  THE  FOUEFOLD  FORM.         143 

As  tliese  are  tlie  only  representations  wliicli  he  is 
specially  invited  to  "  Come  and  see,"  there  is  strong 
evidence  derived  from  this  circumstance,  that  these 
horsemen  constitute  the  fourfold  group  of  the  whole 
prophecy.  In  chs.  xii.  and  xiii.  there  is  a  second 
fourfold  group  which,  on  the  ground  of  the  omission 
of  the  special  formula  of  invitation,  as  well  as  the 
identity  of  the  second  sense,  is  to  be  held  a  duplicate 
group  to  the  above.  There  is  thus  a  double  por- 
traiture with  four  in  each.  Again,  the  plan  or  plot 
of  the  prophetical  piece  shows  likewise  four  actors  in 
it.  Three  enemies,  during  the  course  of  it,  oppress 
the  future  victor  ;  and  three  enemies  against  one  are 
"  gathered  together  to  the  battle  of  that  great  day  of 
God  Almighty."  The  final  catastrophe,  as  well  as  the 
opening  and  the  course  of  the  prophecy,  manifests  a 
fourfold  group.  The  proj)hecy  opens  with  a  horse- 
man on  a  white  horse,  with  three  horsemen,  who  are 
to  be  presumed  to  be  his  antagonists,  ch.  vi. ;  it  closes 
with  a  horseman  on  a  white  horse,  casting  a  beast, 
false  prophet,  ch.  xix.  20,  and  a  dragon,  ch.  xx.  10, 
into  a  lake  of  fire,  which  three,  both  on  the  ground 
of  unity  of  design  and  identity  in  the  second  sense, 
are  to  be  held  symbols  synonymous  with  the  three 
horsemen  with  which  the  conqueror  is  associated  at 
the  commencement. 

The  above  instances  comprise  all  the  larger  and 
fully  developed  specimens  of  symbolic  painting. 

The  contemplation  of  these  symbolical  pictures 
shows  that  the  disposition  of  the  subject  in  a  group 
of  four  is  a  law  of  the  prophetic  allegory,  which  is  of, 


144:  LAW   OF  THE  FOTIRFOLD   FORM. 

universal  observance,  and  which  is  not  departed  from 
unless  it  be  to  double  the  quaternary,  which  is  only 
to  exemplify  the  principle  of  representation  in  another 
way. 

The  presentation  of  the  subject,  then,  in  a  four- 
fold groujp^  is  evidently  a  fundamental  and  estab- 
lished law  of  symbolical  composition,  as  manifestly 
appears  from  the  rigid  adherence  of  the  prophets 
to  this  form  of  representation.  The  number  Four 
sways  and  determines  the  symbolic  prophet  in  the 
arrangement  of  his  materials  and  the  structure  of 
his  piece,  to  such  an  extent,  that  he  never  departs 
from  it. 


CHAPTER   XI. 

THE  DOUBLE  ALLEGORY    OF   THE   EEVELATION,  EXHIBITING 
UNITY  OF  DESIGN  AND  QUATERNAL  STRUCTURE. 

It  will  be  out  of  place  to  submit  here  any  part  of 
that  proof  which,  as  we  conceive,  demonstrates  that 
the  Revelation  contains  a  double  allegory,  that  is,  two 
first  representations  developing  the  same  subject  in 
the  second  sense,  or,  in  other  words,  two  versions  of 
the  same  subject,  which  is  here  a  prophecy,  each  of 
which  versions  is  couched  in  diflerent  but  strictly 
synonymous  symbols.  This  belongs  to  a  difi'erent 
branch  of  the  subject,  which  would  require  to  be 
treated  of  in  a  separate  volume. 

At  present,  we  confine  ourselves  to  a  plain  state- 
ment of  the  twofold  allegory. 

IS'evertheless,  we  found  upon  the  simplicity  of  the 
representation  itself  in  the  double  form  as  a  strong 
reason  in  favor  of  the  reality  of  the  double  version. 
It  may  justly  be  regarded  as  a  thing  impossible  to 
occur  that,  in  any  allegory,  but  more  especially  in  any 
symbolic  allegory,  two  first  representations  should 
be  educible,  distinguished  in  either  by  at  once  uni- 
formity and  simplicity  of  design,  which  representa- 
tions are  yet  not  reduplications  of  each  other.  It 
7 


146  THE   DOUBLE  ALLEGORY. 

may  reasonably  be  held  impossible  that  a  phenome- 
non such  as  this  can  ever  occur.  If  the  present 
statement  then  exhibits  a  double  representation  or  a 
twofold  allegory,  displaying  at  once  simplicity  and 
identity  of  plan  and  design  in  either  form,  the  mani- 
festation of  those  features  may  justly  be  held  to  be 
evidence  that  the  representations  displaying  the  same 
design  contain  the  same  sense.  We  leave  out  of  view 
at  present  the  fact  that  the  two  sets  of  symbols  into 
which  the  analysis  of  the  prophecy  resolves  it,  dis- 
cover, when  tested  by  hieroglyphic  interpretations,  a 
perfect  identity  of  signification.  This  identity  would 
be  evidence  of  reduplication  were  there  no  plan,  for 
if  two  sets  of  signs  are  synonymous,  the  commu- 
nication which  they  make  is  certainly  doubled.  But 
there  is  a  plan  developed  twice  over  which,  if  there  be 
not  reduplication,  may  justly  be  regarded  as  a  phe- 
nomenon such  as  in  a  work  of  the  length,  complexity, 
and  intricacy  of  the  Revelation  cannot  be  conceived 
to  occur.  The  existence,  then,  in  an  allegorical  com- 
position of  one  plan  twice  developed  is,  in  itself,  evi- 
dence of  the  DOUBLE  ALLEGORY.  It  may  also  be  added 
that  the  circumstance  that  a  plan  is  found  twice  de- 
velojyed  is  evidence  that  there  is  in  truth  such  a  plan 
itself,  since  it  is  hardly  possible  to  conceive  that  there 
should  be  two  plans  which  are  the  same,  and  which 
yet  do  not  exist.  If  one  plan  is  found  in  a  book,  it 
is  much,  and  the  discovery  of  it  is  strong  evidence  for 
its  truth,  since  a  satisfactory  plan  for  a  book  can  hardly 
be  invented.  But  if  two  ^lans,  which  are  the  same^ 
are  found  in  it,  the  evidence  in  favor  of  the  reality 


THE  DOUBLE   ALLEGOET.  147 

of  this  plan  is  infinitely  more  than  doubled.  One 
fair  plan  might  possibly  be  educible,  but  the  discovery 
of  two  snch  plans  may  jnstly  be  held  a  thing  alto- 
gether impossible.  But  the  evidence  will  be  rendered 
even  still  higher  if  there  be  ground  to  presume, 
as  is  the  case  with  the  Eevelation,  that  the  author 
does  really  give  two  plans.  The  evidence  will  be 
farther  heightened  if  we  add  that  unity  of  design  and 
the  quaternal  structure  must  be  found  displayed  in 
both  the  plans.  The  discover}^  of  a  plan,  then,  is  an 
evidence  of  its  existence,  since  a  plan  can  hardly  be 
invented.  But  the  discovery  of  two  jolans  which  are 
the  same  for  one  work,  more  especially  with  the  con- 
ditions above-stated  attached  to  them,  may  be  re- 
garded as  demonstrative  evidence  for  the  reality  of 
this  double  plan,  since  it  must  be  held  as  sheerly  im- 
possible to  invent  it. 

Another  reason  for  the  double  allegory  we  shall 
premise  before  proceeding  to  the  statement  of  it. 

The  prophecy  of  the  Kevelation  is  delivered,  as 
we  assume,  which  may  be  very  safely  done,  in  One 
Seven-Sealed  Book,  the  pictures  in  which,  which 
sometimes  pass  from  the  purely  pictorial  state  into 
the  form  of  representations  acted  before  the  mind  of 
the  prophet,  constitute  the  predictioDs.  This  contain- 
ment of  it  in  one  Seven-Sealed  Book  clearly  evidences 
its  U7iity.  But  in  the  exhibition  of  the  pictures  of 
this  book  there  is  a  division  :  a  "  silence  about  the 
space  of  half  an  hour,"  ch.  viii.  1,  divides  the  picto- 
rial representations,  which  come  under  the  seventh 
seal,  from  those  of  the  six  preceding  ones.     Here, 


14:8  THE  DOUBLE  ALLEGORY. 

tlien,  is  a  division  in  that  which  is  one,  which  is  im- 
possible. Impossible  it  is  on  any  other  supposition, 
excepting  that  the  one  set  of  representations  are  re- 
duplications, thus  identical  and  thus  07ie  with  the 
other.  This  is  an  evidence  for  a  double  allegory  which 
it  will  be  difficult  to  set  aside.  The  prophecy  is  rep- 
resented as  07ie  and  also  as  divided  and  twofold,  there 
being  one  division  in  it,  two  things  which  are  incon- 
sistent with  each  other,  absurd  and  impossible.  But 
there  is  neither  inconsistency  nor  impossibility  on  the 
theory  of  a  double  allegory.  The  double  allegory 
thus  solves  an  inconsistency  and  impossibility  which 
must  be  solved.  It  alone  does  this,  for  there  is  plainly 
no  other  supposition  that  can  do  it.  This  is  a  feature 
very  much  in  favor  of  the  double  allegory. 

The  prophecy  then  is  delivered,  in  consonance  with 
the  reason  just  stated,  in  two  allegories,  each  bearing 
the  same  second  sense  and  each  making  the  same 
revelation,  one  of  which  allegories  precedes,  while 
the  other  follows  the  "  silence  in  heaven  about  the 
space  of  half  an  hour,"  which  silence  divides  not  the 
prophecy,  it  being  one,  but  simply  the  representa- 
tions of  it,  making  these  representations,  and  not  the 
prophecy,  which  is  one,  twofold. 

Let  us  examine  the  two  allegories  thus  disposed,  as 
they  are  before  and  after  "  the  silence,"  and  endeavor 
to  perceive  that  identity  which  there  is  ground  to 
conceive  exists,  or  rather  let  us  endeavor  to  discover 
if  there  be  any  difterence  between  them.  This  will 
be  difficult. 

However,  before  entering  on  the  analysis  of  the 


THE  DOUBLE   ALLEGORY.  149 

first  allegory,  we  shall  first  note  a  peculiar  feature  it 
exhibits.  This  peculiar  feature  it  has,  and  which  dis- 
tinguishes it  from  the  second  allegory,  is  the  introduc- 
tion of  four  principal  figures  in  it,  by  the  Four  Living 
creatures  who  call  upon  John  to  "  come  and  see  " 
these  figures.  As  this  is  a  formulary  which  is  visi- 
ble nowhere  else  in  the  book,  the  conclusion  natu- 
rally to  be  drawn  is,  that  the  whole  subject  of  tlie 
prophecy  is  here  developed,  and  that  all  the  other 
pictures  which  John  is  not  called  upon  to  "  come  and 
see  ''  bear  a  subordinate  relation  to  these.  Else  why 
is  the  prophet  called  upon  to  look  upon  these  pictures, 
and  not  the  others  ?  After  "  the  silence,"  there  is  a 
second  fourfold  group,  ch.  xii.-xiii.,  which  John  is 
not  called  upon  to  look  at.  For  what  reason  ?  and 
•there  must  be  some  reason.  Vie  are  not  only  author- 
ized, but  we  are  called  upon  by  every  sound  principle 
of  hermeneutics,  to  suppose  there  is.  It  will  be  difii' 
cult  to  find  any  other  reason,  except  that  the  second 
group  is  a  reduplication  of  the  first.  This  sufficiently 
accounts  for  it  that  the  formula  which  is  used  in  the 
one  case  is  in  the  other  omitted.  It  is  particularly  to 
be  observed  that,  while  in  the  interpretation  of  an  al- 
legory no  stress  ought  to  be  laid  on  mere  phraseology, 
it  is  difierent  where  objects  or  actions  are  described. 
Tliese,  and  not  the  words  (the  words  are  only  valuable 
as  they  indicate  these),  are  the  true  signs  of  the  alle- 
gory. Just  as  in  the  interpretation  of  a  writing,  we 
are  not  at  liberty  to  assume  that  a  word  is  meaning- 
less, neither  is  it  allowable,  or  rather  it  is  much  less 
allowable,  in  the  interpretation  of  an  allegory  to  as- 


150  THE  DOUBLE   ALLEGOEY. 

sume  that  an  action  is  without  meaning,  since  an  ac- 
tion, nnlike  a  'word,  is  a  cumbrous  sign  which  cannot 
with  justice  be  held  as  employed  without  a  purpose. 
Here  is  an  action,  an  important  action,  performed 
by  a  highly  important  symbol.  It  has  a  meaning. 
What  is  it?  It  will  be  ygyj  difficult  to  find  any 
other  meaning  except  that  the  introduction  of  the 
wdiole  subject  of  the  prophecy  is  here  made  by  the 
four  living  creatures.  Accordingly,  the  second  qua- 
ternal  group  in  chs.  vii.  and  xiii.,  consisting  of  the 
Woman,  the  Dragon,  and  the  Two  Beasts,  must  be 
held  to  be  reduplications  of  this  group,  since  the 
whole  subject  of  the  prophecy  is  developed  by  the 
four  living  creatures.  • 

The  first  four  seals  of  the  Seven-Sealed  Book,  as 
they  are  opened  in  order  by  the  Lamb,  display  to  the* 
eyes  of  the  prophet  a  fourfold  group  of  Four  Horse- 
men. The  two  remaining  seals,  the  fifth  and  sixth, 
describe  simply  events.  There  are,  accordingly,  no 
more  than  four  figures  exhibited  before  "  the  silence," 
that  is,  in  the  first  allegory,  which  figures  are  the 
Four  Horsemen.  What  is  the  plot  or  design  develop- 
ed in  it?  Every  allegory  has,  as  has  been  shown, 
necessarily  one  such. 

The  first  Horseman,  the  rider  upon  the  White 
Horse,  is  described  as  a  conqueror.  It  follows  the 
other  three  are  the  combatants  whom  he  conquers, 
for  otherwise  there  were  no  design  in  the  representa- 
tion at  all,  which  is  absurd  and  impossible.  But  the 
victorious  Horseman  of  the  group  is  a  conqueror  in 
the  highest  degree,  for  it  is  said  of  him  that  he  goes 


THE  DOUBLE  ALLEGORY.  151 

forth  "  conquering  and  to  conquer,"  wliicli  is  a  He- 
brew idiom  for  conquering  eminently,  the  2)hraseology 
expressing  simply  the  Hebrew  superlative  form.  It 
is  a  rational  conclusion  that  this  victor,  who  is  de- 
scribed as  a  victor  in  the  highest  degree,  not  only 
overcomes,  but  that  he  exthyates  the  three  combat- 
ants with  which  he  is  associated.  This  is  the  more 
to  be  held,  since  the  first  allegory  ends  with  a  scene 
representing  not  only  victory,  ^vhich,  on  the  ground 
of  unity  of  design,  must  be  held  to  be  his  victory, 
but  perfect  and  everlasting  peace  and  security,  which 
presupposes  the  destruction  of  all  his  enemies,  ch. 
vii.  9-17. 

Such  is  the  fourfold  group  introduced  by  the  four 
living  creatures,  and  the  interpretation  wdiich  is  at 
once  naturally  and  rationally  to  be  formed  of  the  ex- 
hibition made  of  them.  The  first  four  seals,  then, 
simply  contain  a  representation  of  four  agents  or 
actors,  of  whom  one  is  a  victor,  from  which  circum- 
stance a  contest  is  to  be  inferred. 

The  two  following  seals  describe  events.  A  regard 
to  design,  which  the  interpreter  is  not  only  authorized 
but  alwavs  under  oblioiation  to  assume  in  the  work  he 
interprets,  necessitates  the  conclusion  that  these  events 
bear  reference  to  the  fourfold  group  which  the  prophet 
has  just  described.  If  not,  the  actors  are  described 
without  events,  which  is  plainly  absurd  and  an  inference 
not  to  be  drawn.  Accordingly,  the  conclusion  is  a 
necessary  one,  that  the  events  of  these  two  seals  are 
the  events  in  which  the  actors  above-described  are 
concerned. 


152  THE   DOUBLE   ALLEGOEY. 

The  fifth  seal  exhibits  a  scene  of  oppression,  but 
it  is  an  oppression  which  is  to  be  avenged,  and  is  to 
end  in  victory,  for  of  the  oppressed,  it  is  said,  "White 
robes  (the  emblems  of  victory,  for  the  proper  sym- 
bolic force  of  white  throughout  the  book  is  victory) 
were  given  unto  every  one  of  them ;  and  it  was  said 
nnto  them,  that  they  should  rest  yet  for  a  little  season, 
until  their  fellow-servants  also,  and  their  brethren, 
that  should  be  killed  as  they  were,  should  be  ful- 
filled." Ch.  vi.  11.  That  the  church  militant  is 
described  under  this  seal,  there  can  be  no  doubt. 
But  we  have  nothing  to  do  at  present  with  the  second 
sense.  We  are  restricted  to  the  first  representation. 
Here  is  a  representation  of  the  oppressed,  described 
as  "  the  souls  of  them  that  were  slain,"  clothed  with 
white  robes,  emblems  of  future  victory,  and  whose 
cause  is  to  be  avenged.  Who  can  these  be,  but  those 
for  whom  the  Conquering  Horseman  stands  ?  Tliey 
cannot  be  the  conquered,  for  they  are  destined  to 
ultimate  victory.  They  cannot  be  other  conquerors, 
for  such  a  supposition  conflicts  with  unity  of  design, 
in  the  prophetical  piece.  They  are,  accordingly,  the 
final  Conqueror ;  and  his  oppression  for  a  season, 
which  is  stated  to  be  limited,  (v.  11,)  and  which 
in  the  second  allegory  is  defined  to  be  1260  symbol- 
ical days,  is  here  represented.  ISTow  every  victory 
presupposes  a  combat,  and  to  every  combat  there 
are  necessarily  two  sides.  Accordingly,  to  the  full 
development  of  the  subject,  as  displayed  in  the  first 
four  seals,  there  is  necessary  the  representation  of  the 
temporary  defeat  of  the  final  Conqueror.     That  the 


THE   DOUBLE   ALLEGORY.  153 

snbject  is  a  combat,  appears,  as  has  been  stated,  from 
the  fact  that  Four  Horsemen  are  described,  one  of 
whom  is  a  victor.  An  exhibition  of 'the  contest  mi- 
der  this  aspect  of  the  temporary  depression  of  the 
final  Conqueror,  apjDears  to  be  absohitely  requisite  to 
the  real  development  of  the  subject,  which  is  a  contest. 

It  is  certain,  that  in  no  other  way  can  the  com- 
bat, which  is  not  described  in  the  first  four  seals,  be 
at  all  portrayed,  eitlier  with  a  regard  to  consistency 
or  harmony  of  design.  In  keeping  with  neither,  can 
the  prophet  bring  the  Four  Horsemen  a  second  time 
on  the  scene  of  representation.  This  would  have  the 
efl'ect  of  making  the  representation  ushered  in  by  the 
Four  Living-creatures  an  imperfect  one.  But  the 
contest  is  not  developed  in  the  First  Four  Seals  ;  it  is 
merely  indicated.  It  has,  therefore,  still  to  be  devel- 
oped, for  if  not,  then  is  the  exhibition  of  the  Four 
Horsemen,  and  the  victory  of  the  first,  a  mere  idle 
pageant,  which  cannot  be  supposed.  This  develop- 
ment is  made  in  the  fifth  seal,  to  the  extent  of  show- 
ing one  phase  of  the  contest.  The  battle  is  described 
as  going  against  the  final  conqueror,  and  he  is  op- 
pressed for  a  season  by  his  adversaries,  who  triumph 
over  him,  and  trample  him  under  foot.  But  though 
laboring  under  a  defeat,  he  is  assured  of  ultimate 
victory.  Such  is  the  force  of  the  representation  of 
the  fifth  seal. 

But  in  the  following  seal  a  reversal  takes  place  in 
the  respective  position  of  the  belligerents,  and  the 
contest  exhibits  a  very  different  phase.  This  seal 
opens  with  an  exhibition  of  vengeance  : 


154:  THE   DOUBLE   ALLEGORY. 

"  The  kings  of  tlie  eartli,  and  tlie  great  men,  and 
the  rich  men,  and  the  chief  captains,  and  the  mighty 
men,  and  every  bondman,  and  every  freeman,  hid 
'themselves  in  the  dens  and  in  the. rocks  of  the  moun- 
tains ;  and  said  to  the  mountains  and  rocks,  Fall  on 
US,  and  hide  us  from  the  face  of  him  that  sitteth  on 
the  throne,  and  from  the  wrath  of  the  Lamb." — Rev. 
vi.  15,  16. 

What  vengeance  is  this?  Unquestionably  that 
which  was  promised  under  the  previous  seal.  But  it 
is  final  vengeance,  for  t^e  great  day  of  his  wrath  is 
come,  V.  17.  Whose  wrath  ?  Undoubtedly  that  of 
the  Conqueror,  who  is  now  going  forth  "  conquering 
and  to  conquer."  A  regard  to  unity  of  design  in  the 
composition,  which  the  interpreter  is  not  permitted  to 
violate,  as  well,  it  may  be  added,  as  a  regard  to  de- 
sign, connection,  and  sense  in  the  composition  at  all, 
demands  this  conclusion. 

The  two  seals  taken  together,  then,  as  they  ought 
to  be,  develop  that  combat  and  victory  which  is  the 
subject  really  inherent,  although  not  developed,  in 
the  exhibition  of  Four  Horsemen,  one  of  which  is  a 
Victor.  The  first  four  seals,  which  sim23ly  place  a 
group  of  combatants  on  the  canvas,  are  incomplete 
and  unfinished  representations,  w^ithout  the  presence 
of  the  fifth  and  sixth  seals  ;  these  last  are  equally  in- 
complete and  unfinished,  w^ithout  the  presence  of  the 
first.  The  whole,  taken  together,  alone  form  a  com- 
plete composition. 

But  this  victory  of  the  Conqueror  has  a  phase 
different  from   the   avenging  aspect   it   displays   in 


THE  DOUBLE   ALLEGORY.  155 

respect  of  his  adversaries.  This  is  represented  in  the 
remaining  part  oi  the  seal. 

We  have  thus  far  seen  the  Conqneror  marshalled 
■with  his  Four  Antagonists  in  the  First  Four  Seals. 
AVe  have  seen  him  pass  through  a  temporary  defeat 
in  the  Fifth  Seal,  and  we  have  seen  him  taking  ven- 
geance on  his  adversaries  and  achieving  his  victory 
in  the  opening  vision  of  the  Sixth  Seal.  A  tempest 
is  the  image  employed  to  represent  this  consumma- 
tion. Terrible  is  this  victory  to  his  adversaries,  but 
it  has  another  and  a  more  gracious  side,  which  is 
presented  in  the  second  vision  of  the  same  seal.  A 
multitude,  which  is  expressed  by  12  multiplied  into 
12  in  thousands — therefore  a  vast  multitude — is 
sealed,  that  is,  is  unharmed,  by  the  strokes  delivered 
in  the  achievement  of  this  victory,  and  is  redeemed 
and  saved  by  it.  The  great  day  of  the  wrath  of  the 
Lamb  has  come,  as  is  said  in  v.  17  of  the  preceding 
chapter,  but  a  mighty  multitude  is  sealed,  so  that 
the  fury  of  his  avengrng  power  passes  over  them 
unscathed.  T]ie  representation  here  is  similar  in 
strain  with  that  expressed  in  the  following  passage  of 
Isaiah : 

"  Come,  my  people,  enter  thou  into  thy  chambers, 
and  shut  thy  doors  about  thee :  hide  thyself  as  it 
were  for  a  little  moment,  until  the  indignation  be 
overpast.  For,  behold,  the  Lord  cometh  out  of  his 
place  to  punish  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth  for  their 
miquity :  the  earth  also  shall  disclose  her  blood,  and 
^hall  no  more  cover  her  slain." — ch.  xxvi.  20,  21. 

"  In  that  day  the  Lord,  with  his  sore,  and  great, 


156  THE   DOUBLE   ALLEGOKY. 

and  strong  sword,  shall  punisli  leviathan  the  pierc- 
ing serpent,  even  leviathan  that  crooked  serpent ; 
and  he  shall  slaj  the  dragon  that  is  in  the  sea.  In 
that  day  sing  ye  nnto  her,  A  vineyard  of  red  wine. 
I  the  Lord  do  keep  it ;  I  will  water  it  every  moment : 
lest  any  hurt  it,  I  will  keep  it  night  and  day.  Fury 
is  not  in  me  :  who  would  set  the  briers  and  thoi'ns 
against  me  in  battle  ?  I  would  go  through  them,  I 
would  burn  them  together.  Or  let  him  take  hold  of 
m}^  strength,  that  he  may  make  peace  with  me  ;  and 
he  shall  make  peace  with  me.  He  shall  cause  them 
that  come  of  Jacob  to  take  root :  Israel  shall  blossom 
and  bud,  and  fill  the  face  of  the  world  with  fruit." — 
ch.  xxvii.  1-6. 

Tlie  third  vision,  ch.  vii.  8-17,  represents  the 
peace,  security,  and  felicity,  described  in  the  above 
glowing  language  of  the  figurative  prophet,  which 
prevail  in  the  territories  of  the  great  Conqueror,  after 
all  his  enemies  are  destroyed.  The  white  robes  of 
the  multitude,  and  the  palms,  emblems  of  victory, 
in  their  hands,  forcibly  recall  to  the  mind  the  victory 
represented  under  the  First  Seal,  which  is  now  to  be 
regarded  as  w^on.  Here  the  first  allegory  ends,  and 
it  displays,  so  far  as  its  structure  and  composition  is 
concerned,  all  that  can  be  demanded  in  the  first  ver- 
sion of  a  symbolic  prophecy ;  it  displays  unity  of 
design  and  the  quaternal  structure. 

It  is  here  worthy  of  observation  that  it  is  a  matter 
of  no  essential  moment  that  the  imagery  is  changed, 
that  the  temporary  depression  of  the  victor  is  depicted 
under  the  form  of  a  sacrifice^  and  his  vengeance  taken 


THE   DOUBLE    ALLEGORY.  157 

on  Lis  adversaries  under  the  form  of  a  tempest.  Such 
a  cliange  of  imagery  is  common  in  sym])olical  com 
position,  and  cannot  be  Iield  as  making  any  compro- 
mise \vha  ever  of  its  unity  of  idea  or  of  design.  This 
rapid  transition  from  one  to  another  and  different 
image  still  representing  the  same  idea,  is  a  marked 
feature  of  the  Revelation.  It  is  a  chai-acteristic  of 
the  prophet  to  disregard  the  connection  of  imagery 
entirely.  An  equally  abrupt  and  disconnected  tran- 
sition from  one  to  another  image,  as  is  here  displayed, 
occurs  for  example  in  the  symbol,  the  False  Prophet. 
Tlie  False  Prophet  is  nowhere  in  the  book  described, 
and  yet  he  is  cast  into  the  Lake  of  Fire  which,  if  he 
is  not  elsewhere  described,  is  absurd,  and  is  evidence 
that  he  is  described  under  some  other  symbol;  on  the 
other  hand,  the  Harlot  and  the  Two-horned  Beast  are 
fully  described  as  enemies  of  the  Conqueror,  and  yet 
they  are  not  cast  into  the  Lake  of  Fire,  wdiich,  if 
they  are  not  thrown  into  it  in  another  form,  is  equally 
absurd.  It  is  evident  that  the  three  symbols  are  per- 
fectly synonymous.  The  prophet,  however,  passes 
rapidly  from  the  one  to  the  other  without  the  slight- 
est intimation  of  change.  Hence  the  False  Prophet 
is  with  perfect  consistency  represented  as  punished 
and  destroyed  by  being  cast  into  the  Lake  of  Fire, 
but  then  he  has  been  fully  depicted  and  a  full  length 
portraiture  of  his  character  and  doings  has  been 
rendered  under  the  synonymous  symbols  of  the 
Whore  and  the  Two-horned  Beast.  These  two  latter, 
also,  have  justice  executed  upon  them,  for  they  are 
cast  into  the  Lake  of  Fire  under  the  form  of  the  False 


158  THE   DOIJBLE   ALLEGOET. 

Prophet.  A  transition  from  one  image  to  another  is 
not  any  infringement  of  unity  of  idea  or  of  design. 
If  synonymous  words  are  permitted  in  tlie  case  of 
common  language,  why  not  synonymous  hieroglyphic 
signs  in  a  symbolic  writing  ?  If  the  synonymes  do 
not  destroy  the  unity  in  the  one  case,  neither  do 'they 
in  the  other.  It  is  of  great  importance  to  note,  that 
the  symbolic  prophets  by  no  means  make  it  a  principle 
of  their  writing  to  preserve  this  kind  of  unity,  which 
is  a  mere  unity  in  expression,  because  by  looking  for 
it  and  calculating  on  it  we  are  apt  to  be  misled. 
Probably  the  most  of  commentators  have  been  misled 
by  this  very  circumstance,  else  it  is  not  very  easy  to 
see  why  they  should  have  so  much  neglected  and  dis- 
regarded unity  of  design  in  the  composition  they  were 
interpreting  as  they  have  done.  Seeing  the  prophet 
passing  rapidly  from  one  image  to  another,  they  ap- 
pear to  have  fancied  that  he  was  following  no  design 
at  all.  Nearly  all  the  interpretations  which  have 
been  rendered  of  tlie  first  six  seals,  and  they  are  very 
many,  for  no  part  of  the  book  has  been  subject  to 
such  a  variety,  have  been  grounded  on  a  total  ignor- 
ing on  the  part  of  commentators  of  all  design  here. 
Neither  the  introduction  by  the  living  creatures  nor 
the  disposition  of  the  seals  one  to  another  have  been 
held  to  aiford  evidence  of  design  in  the  composition. 
Seeing  the  prophet  pass  from  a  contest,  or  at  least 
from  that  which  indicates  a  contest,  to  a  sacrifice,  and 
from  a  sacrifice  to  a  tempest,  they,  as  it  appears,  have 
supposed  that  the  apostle  had  cast  away  the  wings  of 
the  symbolic  prophet  altogether,  without  which  he 


THE   DOTJBLE   ALLEGOEY.  159 

never  could  raise  himself  from  tlie  ground  and  out- 
strip, as  lie  does,  the  flight  of  time,  and  that  he  is 
treading  the  mere  pedestrian  pathway  of  the  annalist 
who  follows  no  design  at  all,  except  that  which  the 
mere  position  of  his  facts  in  the  order  of  time  furnish. 
Nothing,  accordingly,  can  be  more  indefinite,  not  to 
say  jejune  and  absurd,  as  they  mostly  are,  than  the 
applications  made  of  these  seals.  Commentators 
begin  in  a  certain  indolent  and  indifferent  manner, 
and  apply  them  to  such  events,  which  are  of  a  very 
various  and  piebald  character,  as  are  nearest  hand 
the  time  of  the  prophet,  regarding  no  design  at  all  in 
the  disposition  of  the  symbolical  pictures  excepting 
that  of  the  annalist.  But  the  arrangement  of  the  an- 
nalist is  not  his  but  that  of  the  facts  themselves,  and 
such  as  cannot  be  held  worthy  of  the  name  of  design. 
According  to  the  chronicle  principle  of  arrangement, 
the  first  seal  comes  first,  the  second,  second,  the  third, 
third,  and  so  on  to  the  seventh.  The  Trumpets  then 
follow,  but  these  and  the  remainder  of  the  prophecy 
cannot  be  disposed  of  by  this  principle.  It  is,  ac- 
cordingly, good  for  nothing,  for  it  breaks  down 
and  leaves  the  interpreter  at  a  stand  still  ere  he  is 
lialf  through  with  the  book.  That  the  prophet  pre- 
fers the  order  of  time  and  that  he  has  arranged  some 
parts  of  his  book  upon  this  principle,  as  for  example 
the  Trumpets  and  the  Yials,  is  a  reasonable  supposi- 
tion, and  is  one  supported  by  evidence,  the  evidence 
of  a  really  satisfactory  application  of  these  symbols. 
But  that  he  is  guided  by  no  other  principle  of  ar- 
rangement excepting  this,  is  impossible,  because  there 


160  THE   DOUBLE   ALLEGORY. 

is  in  such  a  simple  principle  of  arrangement  nothing 
worthy  of  the  name  of  design.  But  without  design 
John  is  no  symbolic  prophet,  and  without  a  design 
which  is  profound,  his  long  and  complex  prophecy 
were  destitute  of  all  definite  meaniug,  and  in  every 
proper  sense  of  the  word  unintelligible. 

The  ignoring  of  design  in  the  interpretation  is  an 
error  of  the  first  magnitude.  Design,  however,  has 
here  been  entirely  ignored,  for  the  plan  of  the  annal- 
ist can  never  be  held  to  be  a  design  for  an  allegory. 
This  circumstance  accounts  for  the  nnsatisfactoriness 
of  all  the  interpretations  rendered  of  this  part  of  the 
book.  It  is  design  which  gives  to  the  pictures  of  the 
prophet  their  fixed  and  definite  meaning.  If  the 
prophet  writes  without  design,  his  pictures,  which  are 
for  the  most  part  general,  can  have  no  real  sense. 
If  the  interpreter  explains  without  the  apprehension 
of  this  design,  his  interpretation  can  have  no  value, 
for  rival  interpretations  will  follow  his  in  swift  suc- 
cession. But  design  here  has  not  been  apprehended, 
hence  this  part  of  the  book  cannot  be  said  to  have 
been  interpreted.  But  it  is  no  evidence  of  the  want 
of  design  that  it  has  not  been  apprehended.  ISTor  is 
it  any  evidence  of  the  want  of  design  that  the  design 
does  not  lie  in  the  connection  of  the  imagery.  The 
prophet  himself  furnishes  us  with  evidence  that  his 
design  lies  deeper  than  this  mere  superficiality ;  for 
this  were  nothing  more  than  a  design  in  mere  ex- 
pression ;  the  design  which  he  follows  is  not  a  design 
manifesting  itself  in  the  mere  vehicle  of  expression. 
There  being  no  design  in  this  latter  respect  in  the 


THE   DOUBLE   ALLEGORY.  161 

First  Six  Seals,  as  is  apparent,  it  must  be  that  other 
and  more  recondite  design  which  lie  lbllo^YS — the  de- 
sign in  tlie  subject.  The  case  stands  thns  :  He  mnst 
manifest  design,  in  order  to  be  intelligible,  either  in 
snbject  or  in  expression.  It  is  not  his  principle  to 
manifest  it  in  expression  nor  does  he  do  it  here,  in 
expression,  as  is  evident :  the  conclnsion  follows,  he 
mnst  manifest  it  in  subject,  since  he  must  do  it  in 
one  way  or  the  other.  It  will  be  difficult,  we  believe, 
to  discover  any  other  design  in  the  subject  than  that 
which  has  been  above  stated,  and  when  we  reject,  as 
the  prophet  intimates  we  should  reject,  the  mere  con- 
catenation of  the  imagery,  it  is  very  plainly  dis- 
coverable, and  it  is  a  design  which  the  expression 
itself  develops  with  sufficient  clearness^  provided  the 
due  bearings  of  the  symbolical  pictures  one  on  the 
other  are  sufficiently  regarded. 

The  very  fact  itself  that  in  the  interpretation  of 
the  First  Six  Seals  there  has  existed  such  endless 
variety  and  such  nncertainty,  naturally  inclines  the 
mind  to  the  supposition  that  there  has  been  a  fatal 
error  committed  in  the  interpretation  of  this  part  of 
the  book.  The  assumption,  very  unwarrantably  made, 
that  the  prophet  follows  no  deeper  design  than  that 
of  the  mere  annalist,  and,  as  a  consequence,  that  this 
part  of  the  book  is  merely  the  commencement  and 
not  the  whole  first  version  of  his  prophecy,  form  toge- 
ther a  combined  error  of  such  gigantic  magnitude  as 
is  perfectly  sufficient  to  account  for  the  total  failure 
of  the  interpretation  of  these  Seals. 

A  pause  intervenes  between  the  first  and  second 


162  THE   DOUBLE   ALLEGOKY. 

allegories,  or  the  first  and  second  versions.  "  A  silence 
in  heaven  about  the  space  of  half  an  hour,"  ch.  viii.  1, 
takes  place,  during  which  all  representation  is  sus- 
pended.    This  silence  is  full  of  significance. 

Before  we  enter  on  the  consideration  of  the  second 
allegory,  divided  from  the  first  by  this  panse,  it  may 
be  requisite  to  make  a  single  preliminary  observation. 
We  have  already  taken  notice  of  one  feature  which 
serves  wisely  without  doubt  to  cloud  and  to  conceal 
the  prophet's  design.  This  is  the  change  of  imagery. 
The  practice  of  this  change  is  in  unison  with  the  spirit 
of  his  writing,  and  eminently  subserves  the  main  ob- 
ject of  it.  It  is  dark,  enigmatical,  cryptogrammic ; 
its  professed  object  is  to  conceal  the  meaning.  The 
prophet,  with*this  object  in  view,  inverts  the  words 
of  ordinary  language  and  uses  them,  attaching  totally 
difi'erent  senses  to  them.  This  he  does  to  conceal  the 
meaning  of  his  language.  He  employs  a  change  of 
imagery,  as  we  have  seen,  and  it  is  a  verj^  efifectual 
method  to  conceal  his  design.  If  he  preserved  the 
same  image  throughout,  his  design  would  be  very 
easily  apparent ;  but  he  does  not  do  this ;  he  changes 
his  imagery  perpetually,  and  thus  waylays  his  reader, 
or  rather  his  searcher,  in  the  pursuit,  not  insidiously 
but  wisely,  and  tasks  his  utmost  intellectual  efiTorts 
to  follow  him.  !N^o  sooner  has  the  latter  approached 
him,  it  may  be,  in  one  image,  than  the  prophet  has 
abandoned  it  and  has  taken  up  a  totall}^  difi'erent  one, 
so  that  the  connection  of  one  part  of  his  plan  with 
another  is  apparently  dissolved,  and  the  thread  of  his 
design  is  made  nearly  undiscoverable.    This  is  doubt- 


THE   DOUBLE   ALLEGORY.  163 

less  perplexing,  but  he  warns  him  that  this  is  his 
method  of  writing :  he  stirs  him  up  to  the  exercise  of 
wisdom,  chs.  viii.  18,  xvii.  9,  to  find  out  his  real 
meaning,  while,  moreover,  a  blessing  is  specially 
attached  to  "him  tliat  keepeth  the  sayings  of  the 
prophecy  of  this  book,"  ch.  xxii.  9,  which,  from  the 
professedly  enigmatical  character,  may  reasonably  be 
held  to  have  reference  chiefly  to  the  keeping  of  them 
before  the  mind  for  contemplation,  meditation,  and 
solution. 

But  the  reduplication  of  the  prophecy  is  evidently 
a  condition  in  the  representation  which  stands  in  open 
hostility  with  this  design  of  his.  The  natural  and 
necessary  effect  of  reduplication  is  not  at  all  to  deep- 
en and  increase  the  enigma,  but  on  the  contrary,  to 
resolve  it.  Let  an  enigma,  no  matter  how  profound 
and  dark  it  may  be,  be  only  constructed  in  two  dif- 
ferent forms;  let  it  be  repeated  with  a  change,  it 
will  plainly  run  by  this  duplication  a  much  more 
than  double  risk  of  discovery  and  detection.  By 
adopting  reduplication  then  the  prophet  obviously 
imperils  the  secrecy  of  his  prophecy.  Eeduplication 
is,  however,  the  authoritative  sign  and  pledge  of  a 
divine  revelation  of  the  future  (Gen.  xli.  32)  in  that 
symbolical  language  in  which  the  prophet  writes,  and 
it  accordingly  behooves  him  not  to  withhold  from  his 
prophetic  work  the  recognized  and  formal  sign  of  its 
divine  origin.  This  is  one  reason  which  may  be  re- 
garded as  imposing  upon  him  the  absolute  necessity 
of  reduplication.  But  at  the  same  time  that  this 
feature  endangers  the  secrecy  it  heightens  in  a  pro- 


164:  THE   DOUBLE   ALLEGORY. 

portional  degree  the  definiteness  and  the  ultimate  se- 
curity of  the  meaning.  This  is  an  object  of  no  small 
moment.  These  are  two  important  purposes  accom- 
plished by  it,  which  may  be  regarded  as  sufficiently 
powerful  inducements  to  determine  the  prophet  to 
reduplicate,  no  matter  how  hazardous  it  may  be. 
AYe  make  no  account  here  of  the  fact  that  reduplica- 
tion is  a  law  of  his  art.  But  there  is  need,  more  es- 
pecially in  a  work  of  the  length  of  his,  of  the  utmost 
circumspection  in  the  method  of  performing  it. 

We  have  already  observed  how  his  design  has 
been  veiled  even  in  the  first  short  version,  by  the 
change  of  imagery  which  he  employs.  The  design 
nevertheless  unfolds  itself  in  symmetry.  This  exhi- 
bition of  design  he  has  made  in  the  first  version — 
we  mean  design  in  respect  to  the  arrangement  of  his 
materials.  It  is  accordingly  sufficient  for  his  whole 
work.  If  he  has  given  the  arrangement  of  his  sub- 
ject matter  once^  it  is  all  that  is  requisite — perhaps 
more  than  can  be  demanded.  This  he  has  done.  He 
has  risked  the  discovery  of  the  contents  by  boldly 
prefixing  to  his  prophecy  a  Table  of  Contents,  in 
which  light  the  first  version  is  to  be  viewed.  And 
this  risk  he  has  run  quite  successfully,  for  liis  Table 
of  Contents  has  not  been  discovered  during  the 
long  and  prying  search  of  1800  years.  Indeed  the 
very  boldness  of  the  design  has  been  the  pledge  of 
success,  for  who  would  think  of  looking  into  one  of 
the  symbolic  prophecies  of  Scripture,  dark  and  enig- 
matical as  they  are,  for  that  element  of  perspicuity 
and  plainness,  a  tal)le  of  contents  !     His  very  audaci- 


THE  DOUBLE   ALLEGORY.  165 

tj  lias  here  saved  him.  But  having  provided  his 
prophecy  with  this  mstmiment  of  ordei\  lie  is  enabled 
to  relax  his  order  in  his  second  version.  Here  he 
employs  a  departure  from  order  to  veil  his  design. 
He  veils  by  it  the  design  of  reduplication;  and  he 
veils  by  it  his  whole  design.  He  involves  and  per- 
plexes the  arrangement  in  such  a  manner  as  effect- 
ually to  conceal  the  fact  that  reduplication  exists. 
His  first  version  is  short  and  general,  for  it  is  simply 
a  Table  of  Contents ;  his  second  version  is  long  and 
full  of  matter :  there  is  therefore  no  correspondence 
between  the  two  copies  in  size.  There  is  here  then 
a  cause  at  once  of  mystery  and  of  plainness ;  of  mys- 
tery, that  the  two  versions  are  disproportionate  ;  of 
plainness,  that  the  one  is  an  Index.  He  has  thus 
made  his  prophecy  mysterious  by  delivering  it  in 
two  versions  so  disproportionately  formed,  that  they 
appear  as  one  ;  he  has  made  it  plain  by  prefixing  to 
it  a  Table  of  Contents.  He  has  thus  eminently  ful- 
filled the  conditions  of  symbolic  writing,  which  is  de- 
signed to  be  at  once  excessively  darh  and  excessively 
dear.     There  is  a  profound  wisdom  in  this. 

But,  although  the  prophet  has  discarded  design, 
in  respect  of  the  arrangement  of  his  materials  in  the 
second  version  he  has  not  rejected  it  to  any  such  degree 
that  it  should  form  a  complete  medley  and  a  chaos. 
Order  still  prevails  in  it,  and  may  be  said  to  be  pre- 
dominant in  it.  The  Fourfold  Group  are  not  at  the 
beginning  indeed,  and  in  their  natural  position,  as  in 
the  first  version;  but  they  still  occupy  the  central 
position  in  the  piece,  and  they  appear  in  the  same 


166  THE   DOUBLE   ALLEGORY. 

order  and  succession  as  in  the  first  version.  The 
judgments,  which  are  in  the  sixth  and  last  seal  of  the 
first  version,  are  placed  at  the  beginning  of  the  sec- 
ond, which  is  an  inversion  of  order;  but  these  trum- 
pets of  judgment  are  bio  war  'in  a  regular  succession, 
wdiicli  is  uninterrupted  except  by  what  may  be  re- 
garded simply  as  the  episode  of  ch.  x.-xi.  14.  The  re- 
mainder of  the  second  version  contains  nothing  more 
than  a  recapitulation  of  the  two  final  seals  of  the  first 
version.  The  first  four  seals  then  are  found  in  the 
centre  of  the  second  version ;  a  portion  of  the  sixth 
seal  begins  it,  and  the  remainder  of  what  is  coiv 
tained  in  the  fifth  and  sixth  seals  is  redelivered  in 
that  portion  of  the  prophecy  wdiich  follows  ch.  xiii. 
There  is  thus,  after  all,  no  great  departure  from  the 
unity  of  arrangement. 

But  let  it  be  supposed  there  was  not  a  vestige  of 
uniformity  of  arrangement  discoverable  between  the 
first  and  second  versions.  If  the  analysis  of  the  con- 
tents showed  that  the  subject  in  both  was  the  same, 
this  in  itself  would  justly  be  held  to  be  conclusive 
evidence  of  the  fact  of  reduplication.  But  when  we 
analyze  the  multifarious  materials  of  the  second  ver- 
sion, it  is  found  that  they  resolve  themselves  into  that 
wdiich,  in  a  less  developed  and  more  elementary  form, 
is  contained  in  the  first. 

Let  us,  as  the  prophet  has  done,  depart  from  the 
order  of  arrangement,  and  begin  the  analysis  wdtli 
the  Fourfold  Group,  wdiicli  is  introduced  by  the  Four 
Living  creatures,  stands  at  the  head  of  the  first  ver- 
sion, occupies  the  centre  of  the  second,  and  which  evi- 


THE  DOUBLE   ALLBGOET.  167 

dently  is  the  main  and  grand  constituent  of  the  whole 
pi'ophecy.  This  group  we  j^erceive  in  chs.  vii.  and 
xiii.  in  the  figures  of  the  Woman,  the  Dragon,  the  Ten- 
horned  and  the  Two-liorned  Beasts, — symbols  corre- 
spondent in  signification  in  the  first  sense  they  bear, 
and  answering  in  order  to  the  Four  Horsemen  of  the 
first  four  seals.  In  the  crown  on  the  head  of  the  Wo- 
man we  recognize  the  crown  of  the  Conqueror  of  the 
first  seal :  in  her  persecution  and  flight  into  the  wil- 
derness for  1260  days  we  perceive  the  reduplication 
of  the  representation  made  under  the  fifth  seal,  when 
the  Conqueror  sustains  a  temporary  defeat.  Her  mar- 
riage, which  is  announced  at  the  end  of  the  book,  ch. 
xxi.  2,  9,  is  but  an  exhibition  under  a  new  image  of  the 
yictory  of  the  combating  and  conquering  Horseman, 
for  a  glorious  marriage  is  to  the  pure  and  chaste  Wo- 
man what  victory  is  to  the  warlike  and  combating 
Horseman.  Her  blissful  wedlock-state  represented  by 
the  glory  of  the  'New  Jerusalem,  where  the  symbol, 
a  woman^  passes  into  the  synonymous  one  of  a  city, 
is  in  every  respect  correspondent  with  the  represen- 
tation of  the  state  of  triumph  and  felicity  in  the  do- 
minions of  the  Conqueror  described  in  ch.  vii.  9-17. 
Tracing  the  history  of  the  Woman,  then,  we  find 
nothing  but  the  Conqueror  under  another  form.  The 
same  design  is  pursued,  and  the  same  idea  is  devel- 
oped under  both  the  symbols.  But  the  identification 
may  be  still  more  closely  made,  through  the  medium  of 
a  symbol,  which  is  combined  with  the  Woman.  This 
is  her  son.  Here  we  again  observe,  that  total  disre- 
gard of  the  naturalness  and  the  congruity  of  the  repre- 


168  THE  DOUBLE   ALLEGORY. 

sentation,  wliicli  is  not  an  infrequent  characteristic  of 
symbolic  prophecy.  It  is  equally  nnnatiiral  and  in- 
congruous that  a  pure  and  chaste  woman,  which  this 
woman  is  represented  to  be,  should  bear  a  son  with- 
out marriage,  as,  for  example,  that  ears  of  corn  should 
devour  other  ears.  Gen.  xli.  24,  or  that  horns  apart 
from  living  animals  should  pursue  carpenters.  Zech. 
i.  19.  Symbolic  prophecy,  scorns  all  such  restraint 
and  tramples  down  all  such  absurdities.  It  is  a 
characteristic  of  the  writing ;  the  interpreter  is  only 
required  to  conform  himself  to  it.  But  there  is  here 
nothing  more  in  effect  than  a  mutation  of  the  symbol. 
The  woman  passes  into  another — or  rather  she  is  redu- 
plicated in  another  symbol.  She  appears  in  her  son 
simply  in  another  form.  In  this  son,  then,  whom  she 
bears,  and  in  whose  history  the  same  idea  and  design 
is  developed,  we  behold  the  future  Conqueror  himself 
as  he  appears  going  forth  on  his  victorious  career  un- 
der the  First  Seal ;  for  this  offspring  is  a  man-child 
who  shall  "rule  all  nations  with  a  rod  of  iron." — Ch. 
xi.  5.  In  other  parts  of  the  book,  and  in  other  symbols 
besides  these — for  the  book  teems  with  synonymous 
s^^mbols — we  recognize  the  Conqueror.  We  see  him, 
in  ch.  xix.  11-21,  represented  by  the  same  symbol — 
a  Horseman  on  a  White  Horse,  as  under  the  first  seal ; 
we  recognize  him  in  another  form,  that  of  Michael, 
who  fights  with  and  overcomes  the  Dragon,  ch.  xii.  7, 
in  the  Lamb  upon  Mount  Zion,  ch.  xiv.,  and  else- 
where. But  a  leading  synonymous  sign  under  which 
he  appears,  and  in  which  aloiie  his  history  is  fully 
developed,  is  the  Woman  passing  through  the  vale. 


THE   DOUBLE   ALLEGORY.  169 

or  the  wilderness  of  persecution,  to  the  ultimate  tri- 
umph of  a  glorious  marriage,  when  this  symbol  itself 
passes  into  tlie  correspondent  one  of  the  city^  the  ISTew 
Jerusalem.  In  this  the  defeat  and  final  victory  of 
the  Conqueror  are  depicted.  The  other  symbols  are 
to  be  regarded  as  variations  performed  on  the  lead- 
ing theme.  It  is  to  be  remembered  that  the  second 
is  the  reduplicating  version,  and  the  perfect  one  con- 
tained in  the  Seventh  and  perfect  Seal.  It  abounds 
with  repetitions  of  the  subject,  and  with  rehearsals 
of  it  under  fresh  imagery.  It  is  the  reduplicating  the 
full  and  the  perfect  version.  There  are,  accordingly, 
many  synonymous  signs  in  it  for  the  Conqueror.  The 
Woman  is  the  chief  of  these. 

The  Dragon  is  the  second  symbol  of  the  Fourfold 
Group  in  the  second  version.  His  color  is  red,  cor- 
respondent with  that  of  the  Red  Horse  of  the  Second 
Seal.  It  is  the  only  instance  in  which  the  color  is 
mentioned  in  the  second  quarternary ;  and  it  develops 
the  correspondence.  Nevertheless,  the  colors  of  the 
other  members  of  the  group  may  legitimately  be  in- 
ferred to  be  the  same  as  in  the  first  quaternary,  for 
the  prevailing  color  of  the  "Woman,  clothed  with 
beaming  light,  and  with  the  sun,  is  certainly  to  be  in- 
ferred to  be  white,  and  the  color  thus  to  stand  in 
unison  with  the  white  of  the  White  Horse.  The  Ten- 
horned  sea-monster  is  to  be  inferred  to  be  llach^  the 
color  of  the  real  monsters  of  the  deep,  and  tlierefore 
to  correspond  with  that  of  the  Black  Horse;  the  Two- 
horned  land  beast  to  be  j9(2/^,  like  some  of  tlie  most 
savage  land  animals,  and  therefore  the  color  to  be 
8 


170  THE  DOUBLE   ALLEGORY. 

the  same  as  that  of  the  Pale  Horse.  This  corre- 
spondence may  be  inferred,  although  it  cannot  be 
proved.  If  we  follow  the  history  of  the  Dragon, 
we  see  the  history  of  one  of  the  combatants  of  the 
conquering  Horseman.  We  find  him  cast  from 
heaven  to  earth  by  Michael,  ch.  xii.  T,  who  is  a  synony- 
mous symbol  for  the  Conqueror.  We  find  him  per- 
secuting the  Woman,  ch.  xii.  13,  likewise  a  synony- 
mous symbol :  he  is  therefore  waging  war  against 
the  Conqueror:  he  is  described  as  forming  a  con- 
federacy against  him  in  conjunction  with  his  allies, 
the  Beast  and  the  False  Prophet,  ch.  xvi.  13,  11 :  he 
is  bound  for  a  season,  and  restrained  from  action,  but 
•is  loosed  from  his  prison,  when  he  makes  a  final  onset 
against  the  Conqueror,  which  ends  in  his  being  taken 
and  destroyed,  by  being  cast  into  a  lake  of  fire  and 
brimstone,  ch.  xx.  He  is  accordingly  one  of  the 
three  antagonists  who  are  represented!  in  the  first 
Four  Seals  as  entering  into  combat  with  the  Con- 
queror of  the  book,  and  he  answers  in  the  second 
version  to  the  Eed  Horse  and  Eider  of  the  first  ver- 
sion. 

The  Ten-horned  Beast  is  the  third  member  of  this 
fourfold  group  we  are  examining.  He  is  an  asso- 
ciate and  an  ally  of  the  Dragon,  having,  as  appears 
from  ch.  xiii.  4,  the  same  "  worshippers :  "  he  makes 
war  on,  and  persecutes  what,  on  the  above  ground, 
as  well  as  for  the  reason  that  the  length  of  the  pe- 
riod is  precisely  the  same,  must  be  understood  to 
be  the  same  power  as  the  Dragon,  the  period  of  his 
continuation  and  making  war  on  the   saints,  being 


THE  DOUBLE  ALLEGORY.  171 

forty-two  months,  cli.  xiii.  5-7,  wliicli  is  the  same 
as  the  1260  days  of  the  Dragon's  persecution :  he 
is  a  member  of  the  threefold  confederacy  which  is 
formed  against  the  Conqueror  previous  to  the  final 
battle  :  ch.  xvi.  13,  14 :  his  presence  in  this  final 
battle  is  described,  ch.  xix»  19,  20,  when  he  is  taken 
captive  and  cast  into  "  a  lake  of  fire,  burning  Avith 
brimstone."  He  is  evidently,  then,  a  second  of  the 
three  combatants. 

The  Two-horned  Beast  is  the  last  member  of  the 
Quaternary.  He  is  an  associate  of  the  Dragon,  for 
he  "  speaks  like  "  one,  ch.  xiii.  2,  and  "  he  exerciseth 
all  the  power  of  the  first  beast  before  him,"  v.  12, 
who,  as  it  has  been  shown,  is  an  ally  of  the  Dragon. 
He  is  accordingly  in  alliance  with  the  Dragon  and 
in  comhinatioii  with  the  Ten-horned  Beast.  As  these 
have  been  shown  to  be  two  combatants  of  the  Con- 
queror, he  is  necessarily  the  third.  His  complete 
identification  with  the  Ten-horned  Beast,  as  merely 
another  j^Aa^^  of  him,  is  shown  in  various  parts  of  his 
portraiture,  as  it  is  rendered  in  ch.  xiii.  11-18.  But 
the  real  amalgamation  of  the  two  is  more  vividly  por- 
trayed, and  is  allegorically  represented  by  the  com- 
bination of  the  two  in  one  compound  symbol,  viz., 
a  Ten-horned  Beast  and  a  Whore  riding  on  it,  which 
is  done  in  ch.  xvii.  In  ch.  xiii.  they  are  repre- 
sented as  they  existed  during  the  period  of  the  1260 
days,  when  the  conflict  of  war  went  in  their  favor  and 
victory,  for  a  temporary  season,  perched  upon  their 
standards.  In  ch.  xvii.  they  appear  when  this  pe- 
riod of  temporary  triumph  has  ended  and  when  they 


172  THE   DOUBLE   ALLEGORY. 

are  driven  into  the  wilderness,  in  which  they  are  now 
seen,  v.  3 — the  wilderness,  an  image  bearing  the  sense 
of  defeat  in  respect  to  the  contest,  and  in  which  the 
Woman  had  sojourned  during  the  period  in  which 
their  cause  had  had  the  ascendency.     The  wiklerness, 
as  it  respects  the  four  combatants,  is  evidently  a  cor- 
respondent image  for  defeat  in  a  coinbat.     When  the 
Drao-on  drives  the  Woman   into  the  wilderness   he 
then   must  be  understood   as   overcoming  the  Con- 
queror, if  we  hold  in  view  unity  of   design  in  the 
structure  of  the  prophetical  piece,  as  we  are  bound  to 
do  ;  when  the  Woman  flees  into  the  wilderness  for  1260 
days,  the  victor  is  defeated  by  the  three  combatants 
who  contend  with  him,  and  the  defeat  lasts  for  the 
period  thus  measured  out ;  when  the  Beast  and  the 
Whore  are  in  the  w^ilderness,  in  which  there  is  water, 
the  Beast  being  a  sea-monster,  ch.  xvii.  1,  3,  victory 
reverts  to  the  side  of  the  final  Conqueror,  and  they, 
in  their  turn,  are  defeated.     This  image,  however,  is 
not   used   in   the   latter  reference  in  respect  of  the 
Dragon — the  correspondent  expression  applied  to  him 
is  his  being  chained  in  the  bottomless  pit,  or,  as  the 
translation  should  be,  the  abyss  of  the  sea^  for  a  season. 
The  reason  for  this  probably  is,  his  identification  as  a 
symbol  with  the  dragon  of  the  waters,  while  the  rea- 
son for  the  wilderness,  in  the  same  sense,  being  em- 
ployed in  respect  of  the  Beast   and  the  Whore,  may 
be  held  to  be  to  place  the  Whore  and  the  retribution 
inflicted  on  her  in  stronger  contrast  with  the  chaste 
Woman  that  was  persecuted  and  forced  to  flee  into 
the  wilderness.     The  same  idea,  however,  is  prose- 


THE   DOUBLE   ALLEGOKY.  173 

ciitecl  tliroiighoiit  the  representation  made,  whether 
by  the  same  or  by  a  change  of  imagery,  which  idea 
is  the  development  of  the  relations  of  the  fonr  actors 
of  the  prophetical  piece  or  combatants  as  they  appear 
in  the  first  fonr  seals,  one  to  another.  The  shifting 
and  changing  of  imagery,  the  nse  of  synonymous 
symbols,  does  not  affect,  as  has  been  already  shown, 
the  nnity  of  design  nor  tlie  nnity  of  idea,  which,  if 
we  would  understand  an  allegorical  prophecy,  mnst 
be  steadily  kept  in  view. 

The  symbol,  the  Two-horned  Beast,  which  has  al- 
ready been  once  changed  in  the  second  version  into 
the  Whore,  undergoes  a  farther  transmutation  and 
passes  into  the  False  Prophet,  which  last  is  retained  to 
the  end.  The  change  of  the  two  single  figures,  the  Ten- 
horned  and  the  Two-horned  Beasts,  into  the  one  com- 
posite one  of  the  Ten-horned  Beast  and  the  Whore 
riding  on  it,  was  made  probably  for  the  purpose  of 
representing  the  close  combination  and  real  unity  of 
these  two  actors,  which  is  developed  in  words  in  ch. 
xiii.,  and  which,  in  ch.  xvii.,  is  represented  b}'-  their 
combination  in  a  compound  symbol.  The  transmuta- 
tion of  the  Whore  into  the  new  and  undescribed 
symbol,  the  False  Prophet,  on  the  occasion  of  the 
final  conflict,  as  the  j^i'eparations  for  it  are  described, 
ch.  xvii.  13,  1^,  and  as  it  is  in  part  detailed,  ch.  xix. 
11-21,  may  be  held  to  have  been  done  for  the  sake 
of  making  a  full  display  of  the  three  enemies  of  the 
Conqueror  on  the  great  and  decisive  battle-field. 
Thus,  the  Whore,  who  is  in  herself  no  proper  com- 
batant and  could  not  well  be  represented  going  un- 


1T4  THE   DOUBLE   ALLEGORY. 

armed  and  on  foot  to  battle,  is  dropped.  The  Two- 
horned  Beast  is  not  taken  up  again,  because,  as  may 
be  supposed,  this  beast  had  only  two  horns  like  a 
lamb,  ch.  xiii.  11,  and  therefore  was  unable  to  fight. 
A  fresh  symbol  is  invented,  the  False  Prophet,  who 
goes  into  battle  in  the  capacity  of  chaplain  to  the 
host,  which,  though  it  be  only  represented  by  the 
Dragon  and  the  Beast,  consists,  as  we  learn  from  ch. 
xvi.  14,  of  "  the  kings  of  the  earth  and  the  whole 
world,"  that  is,  the  whole  world  under  their  infi.uence 
and  represented  by  these.  It  is  to  be  observed  that, 
with  a  due  regard  to  the  second  sense,  the  prophet 
could  not  properly  put  arms  into  the  hands  of  the 
third  combatant,  because  this  combatant  stands  for  an 
ecclesiastical  powder.  The  above  may  be  held  to  be 
reasons  accounting  for  the  transition  made  by  the 
prophet  from  the  Two-horned  Beast  to  the  Whore, 
and  from  the  latter  to  the  False  Prophet.  Bat  the 
interpreter  is  neither  bound  to  find  reasons  nor  the 
prophet  to  act  upon  any,  in  this  regard,  because  it  is  the 
principle  of  the  latter  to  change  his  imagery.  He  is 
therefore  at  liberty  to  alter  it  without  reason.  It  is  a 
mode  of  representation  which  he  displays  with  great 
versatility  and  profusion  throughout  his  whole  book. 
It  is  full,  from  beginning  to  end,  of  symbols  that  are 
synonymous.  With  these  he  can  pursue  his  unity  of 
design  just  as  well  as  with  symbols  that  are  identical. 
The  conflict,  however,  is  the  main  design  which 
this  great  symbolical  painting  displays,  and  though 
there  are  many  scenes  and  figures  on  its  canvass  they 
are  all  illustrative  of  the  one  idea  which  a  war  and 


THE   DOUBLE   ALLEGORY.  175 

victory  embody.     The  prophecy  opens  with  the  ex- 
hibition of  a  Conqueror  and  three  antagonists  in  one 
group  of  Four  Horsemen,   to   which   the   prophet's 
special  attention  is  called  by  the  Four  Living-crea- 
tures.     Tlie   first  version  ends  with   a   magnificent 
display  of  triumph  and  victory.     The  second  version 
opens  with  the  trumpets  of  war.     "War  and  a  contest 
form,  if  not  the  sole,  the  leading  thread  of  connec- 
tion throughout  its  complex  and  multifarious  visions. 
Here  the  development  is  clearly  made  that  it  is  to  a 
decisive  and  final  battle  that  events  tend.    Three  ene- 
mies, as  in  the  first  version,  are   marshalled  against 
the  single  Conqueror,  who  are  here  the  Dragon,  the 
Beast,  and  the  False  Prophet.     The  Conqueror  him- 
self appears  as   the  same  Horseman  on  the  White 
Horse,  with  which  the  first  version  and  the  prophecy 
itself  opened,  as  if  to  mark  the  unity  of  idea  and  of 
design  which  pervades  it.     If  the  single  Conqueror  is 
the  same,  this  of  itself  may  be  held  evidence  that  his 
enemies  are  the  same.     This  Conqueror,  in  the  second 
version,  overcomes,   takes  captive,  and  casts  into  a 
lake  of  fire  burning  with  brimstone  his  three  enemies, 
the  Beast,  the  False  Prophet,  and  the  Dragon.     This 
consummation  of  vengeance  has  its  counterpart  in  the 
first  version  in  the  tempest,  under  the  Sixth  Seal. 
The  war  is  finished  by  the  destruction  of  the  enemy. 
Glor}^,  peace,  and  everlasting  felicity  are  the  rewards 
of  this  victory.     These  are  described  in  glowing  terms 
at  the  close  of  the  Sixth  Seal,  and  in  the  same  and 
even  more   glowing   language   at   the   close   of  the 
Seventh  and  perfect  Seal,  chs.  xxi.  and  xxii.     The 


176  THE   DOUBLE  ALLEGOKY. 

same  victory  then  of  one  Conqneror  over  three  an- 
tagonists is  the  tlieme  of  that  part  of  the  prophecy 
which  precedes  and  of  that  part  which  succeeds  "the 
silence  in  heaven  about  the  space  of  half  an  hour," 
and  which  thns  contains  t^^o  allegories,  displaying 
the  same  unity  of  conception. 

In  the  first  allegory  or  version,  which  is  as  we 
have  called  it  and  not  without  reason  a  Table  of  Con- 
tents to  the  second,  the  subject  is  merely  sketched. 
The  four  combatants  in  the  contest  are  displayed  in 
the  first  four  seals  resting  as  it  were  upon  their  arms  ; 
the  shock  of  battle  is  undepicted.  The  events  of  the 
contest  are  described  in  merely  general  terms  in  the 
two  following  seals.  The  fifth  seal  descri1)es  the 
events  as  being  adverse  to  the  Conqueror.  The  sixth 
peal  represents  them  as  destructive  to  his  enemies  and 
victory-bringing  to  himself;  with  the  emblems  of 
which  victory  and  the  triumph  that  follows  it  the 
first  version  closes. 

The  second  allegory  may  be  searched  with  the 
utmost  scrutiny  ;  nothing  more  than  this  subject  will 
be  found  in  it. 

The  fourfold  group  appears  here  not  as  before  in 
the  form  of  Four  Horsemen,  but  in  the  form  of  a 
"Woman,  a  Dragon,  a"  Ten-horned  Beast,  and  a  Two- 
horned  Beast,  which  are  described  in  chs.  xii.  and  xiii. 
at  much  greater  length  and  with  more  detail  than  the 
correspondent  portraitures  are  given  in  the  first 
version.  They  are  also  seen  not  simply  at  rest,  as 
there,  but  engaged  in  action. 

The  first  of  this  group  is  expressed  throughout 
this  version  by  several  symbols  which  are  synony- 


THE   DOUBLE   ALLEGORY.  177 

mons,  and  the  principal  of  wliicli  are  Michael,  ch. 
xii.  7,  the  Conqueror  on  the  White  Horse,  ch.  xix.  11, 
which  is  the  same  as  in  the  first  version ;  the  Two 
Witnesses,  ch.  xi.  3  ;  the  Lamb  upon  Mount  Zion, 
ch.  xiv.  1,  and  the  New  Jerusalem,  chs.  xxi.  xxii. 

The  second,  the  Dragon,  appears  nnder  the  sy- 
nonymous names  of  Satan,  the  Devil,  the  old  serpent, 
and  the  accuser  of  the  brethren. 

The  Beast  stands  alone  and  in  a  bad  eminence  as 
the  Beast — the  only  designation  applied  to  him. 

The  Ten-horned  Beast  is  transmogrified  into  the 
Whore  and  the  city  Babylon  of  chs.  xvii.  and  xviii., 
and  the  False  Prophet  of  ch.  xvi.  13,  xix.  20. 

The  strictly  synonymous  nature  of  these  various 
names  or  designations  may  be  demonstrated  from  the 
identity  of  signification  which  they  bear  in  the  second 
sense.  But  it  may  also  be  proved  even  in  the  first 
sense  on  the  two  grounds,  at  once,  of  nnity,  and  of 
consistency  of  design  in  the  piece. 

Such  are  the  four  agents  in  the  second  version.  They 
evidently  reduplicate  the  quaternal  group  of  the  first. 

The  character  of  the  events  described  throughout 
this  version  is  the  same  as  in  the  first.  They  resolve 
themselves  into  these  two  grand  branches,  marked  in 
the  first  version  by  being  placed,  the  one,  under  the 
fifth,  the  other,  nnder  the  sixth  seal.  The  one  of  these 
divisions  comprehends  the  depression  of  the  Con- 
queror and  the  temporary  triumph  of  liis  adversaries  ; 
the  other,  the  victory  of  the  Conqueror,  and  the  final 
destruction  of  his  enemies. 

The   reduplication   of  the   fifth  seal  of  the  first 


178  THE   DOUBLE   ALLEGOET. 

Yersion  appears  in  the  second,  on  the  one  hand,  in 
the  flight  of  the  Woman  into  the  wilderness  for  1260 
days,  ch.  xii.  6,  and  in  the  prophesying  of  the  Two 
'Witnesses  in  sackcloth,  for  this  period,  ch.  xi.  3  ;  and, 
on  the  other,  in  the  persecution  of  the  Dragon  for 
1260  days,  ch.  xii.  14,  and  the  continuing  (to  make 
war  on  the  saints)  of  the  Beast,  (all  whose  power 
the  Two-horned  Beast  exerciseth,  ch.  xiii.  12,)  for  42 
months  which  is  1260  days,  ch.  xiii.  5,  and  also  in 
the  treading  under  foot  by  the  Gentiles  of  the  holy 
city  for  42  months,  ch.  xi.  2. 

The  Sixth  Seal,  w^hich  is  longer  than  the  other  in 
the  first  version,  receives  in  the  second  a  proportion- 
ally long  recapitulation.  The  chief  remaining  part 
of  this  version  is  almost  entirely  devoted  to  the  re- 
capitulation of  this  seal. 

It  opens  with  judgment.  In  the  second  version  the 
judgments  on  the  three  enemies  who  fought  and  for  a 
season  opj^ressed  the  Conqueror,  are  represented  by 
Seven  Trumpets,  the  last  of  which  completes  their 
destruction,  chs.  viii.,  xi.  This  seventh  and  last 
Trumpet  is  what  is  to  be  understood  as  having  its 
special  counterpart  in  the  Tempest  of  the  Sixth  Seal ; 
but  in  the  first  version  all  the  judgments  are  to  be 
regarded  as  comprehended  in  the  representation  made 
of  this  last,  which  is  to  be  looked  upon  there  as  the 
representative  of  the  whole.  The  Seventh  Trumpet 
is  subdivided  into  Seven  Yials  or  Seven  Last  Plagues 
of  judgment.  This  subdivision  presents  a  description 
of  the  particular  events  which  mark  the  last  judg- 
ment, chs.  XV.,  xvi. 

The   desperate   condition   of    the   three   enemies 


THE    DOUBLE   ALLEGORY.  179 

during  the  period  of  the  judgment  is  described  in 
reference  to  two  of  them  by  the  representation  of  the 
Beast  and  the  Whore  in  the  wilderness,  ch.  xvii.  3. 
The  condition  of  the  Dragon  during  this  period  is 
described  bj  his  being  cliained  in  the  bottomless  pit 
or  abyss  for  the  extravagant  period  of  1000  years! 
The  contest  in  its  intensity  lasts  for  1260  days,  and  as 
an  episode  in  it  the  Dragon  is  chained  for  1000  years ! 
This  is  one  of  those  absurdities  which,  as  has  been 
already  referred  to,  more  or  less  characterize  the  first 
representation  of  a  prophetic  allegory.  It  looks  on  the 
first  sense  as  a  mere  phantasm  and  disfigures  it  at  its 
pleasure.  The  absurdity  here,  however,  is  not  greater, 
by  no  means  so  great,  as  tliat  involved  in  the  concep- 
tion that  a  lamb  should  take  a  book  and  open  the 
seven  seals  of  it,  ch.  vi.,  or  that  a  water-Dragon 
should  be  seen  in  the  sky,  ch.  xii.  Symbolic  pro- 
phecy delights  in  such  extravagances  ;  she  excels  all 
orators  in  the  boldness  of  her  figures.  The  second 
sense  shows  that  this  period,  wdth  such  audacity  of 
statement  made  so  extravagantly  long,  is,  in  truth,  in 
com2:)arison  of  the  1260  days,  an  incomparably  short 
period. 

Such  is  the  miserable  condition  of  the  three  ene- 
mies as  they  are  subjected  to  the  strokes  of  that  ven- 
geance and  judgment  promised  to  the  persecuted 
under  the  fifth  seal,  or,  to  use  the  imagery  of  the 
sixth  seal,  as  they  are  lying  under  the  awful  tempest 
in  the  great  day  of  the  wrath  of  the  Lamb  ;  and 
which,  in  the  second  allegory,  reappears  in  another 
form  in  the  efi^usion  of  Seven  Golden  Yials  full  of  the 
wrath  of  God. 


180  THE   DOUBLE   ALLEGORY. 

The  final  consummation  occurs  in  the  Seventh  and 
last  Vial  and  while  the  last  notes  of  the  Seventh  Trum- 
pet are  sounding.  The  Beast  and  the  False  Prophet 
are  taken  captive  and  cast  by  the  great  Conqueror 
into  a  lake  of  fire,  ch.  xix.  20  ;  the  city,  Babylon,  falls, 
whicli  is  a  rehearsal  in  part  of  the  above,  ch.  xviii.  ; 
the  Dragon  is  cast  into  the  same  lake  of  fire  and 
brimstone  in  which  "  the  Beast  and  the  False  Prophet 
are,"  ch.  xx.  10.  Such  is  the  destiny  of  those  three 
enemies  that  presumed  to  measure  swords  with  the 
great  victor,  who,  in  the  first  seal,  is  seen  unfurling 
his  auspicious  ensign  and  going  forth  "  conquering 
and  to  conquer."  He  achieves  a  hard-wrought  vic- 
tory ;  in  this  achievement  we  see  the  design  of  the 
work  and  the  unity  of  its  design  exemplified. 

The  victorious  course  of  the  Conqueror,  as  he  in- 
flicts the  judgments  above-described,  after  the  long 
period  of  his  depression  has  passed  away,  during 
which  he  succumbed  to  his  enemies,  is  more  particu- 
larly represented  in  ch.  xix.,  while  it  is  elsewhere  re- 
ferred to. 

Such  is  the  recapitulation  in  the  second  allegory 
of  the  Tempest  of  the  sixtli  seal. 

But  the  sixth  seal  depicts  also  the  triumph  of  the 
victor  in  glowing  language,  ch.  vii.  9-17.  This 
triumph  is  described  in  still  more  vivid  colors  in  the 
representation  which  ends  the  seventh  seal  and  closes 
the  second  allegory,  chs.  xxi.,  xxii. 

There  is,  then,  in  the  Revelation,  a  double  alle- 
gory exhibiting  in  each  form  of  it  unity  of  design,  and 
displaying  a  fourfold  group  in  each. 


SECTION  II. 

SECOND  REPRESENTATION  OF  THE  ALLEGORY. 


CHAPTEE  I. 

KEY   TO   TPIE    SECOND    AND    REAL    SENSE    OF    A    PEOPHETIC 
ALLEGORY. 

It  has  been  seen  there  is  a  vast  difference  between 
figurative  and  allegorical  language.  The  former 
presents  no  enigma,  for  it  combines  the  two  mental 
pictures  which  compose  and  complete  the  figurative 
representation  made,  and  explains  itself.  It  is  rare, 
accordingly,  that  an  interpretation  is  formally  ren- 
dered of  this  kind  of  writing  ;  if  there  is,  the  figure 
is  really  a  fragmentary  allegory.  Scripture  affords, 
however,  many  interpretations  of  allegories,  especially'' 
of  the  allegorical  propliecies.  They  were  requisite  ; 
an  allegory  is  an  enigma  :  it  contains,  but  it  witholds, 
if  not  entirely,  to  a  great  extent,  the  second  picture. 
They  were  peculiarly  necessary  in  respect  to  the  alle- 
gorical prophecies.  These  are  couched  in  hieroglyph- 
ical  signs  organized  into  a  language.     The  sense  of 


182  KEY   TO    THE    SECOND    SENSE. 

tlie  signs  of  this  language  required  to  be  cleiimtely 
fixed. 

It  is  immaterial  to  our  present  purpose  to  ascertain 
the  origin  of  these  hieroglyphical  signs.  They  are 
probably  remains  of  that  anuient  hieroglyphic  mode 
of  writing  which  certainly  preceded  the  invention  of 
the  alphabet,  and  which,  having  passed  out  of  general 
use,  were  enigmatical  and  suitable  as  vehicles  for  the 
delivery  of  prophecy.  Eor  this  they  were  eminently 
suitable,  inasmuch  as  they  combined  definiteness  with 
concealment  of  meaning.  It  is  enough  to  know  that 
they  are  used  by  the  symbolic  prophets,  that  sucli 
interpretations  are  rendered  of  them  in  Scripture  as 
to  leave  no  doubt  in  regard  to  the  signification  of  the 
greater  part  of  them,  and  that  they  form  a  language, 
wliich,  although  it  bears  a  certain  analogy  to  ordinary 
figurative  language,  is  still  essentially  difi'erent  from  it. 

It  is  obvious  from  what  has  been  said  in  the  pre- 
ceding pages  that  the  interpretation  of  an  allegory 
consists  in  nothing  more  and  nothing  less  than  the 
discovery  of  that  second  picture  which  it  conceals 
from  view,  but  which  it  bears,  and  in  which  its  real 
sense  lies. 

In  regard  to  a  prophetic  allegory  the  following 
means  contribute  to  this  end  : 

1^^.  Circumstances  connected  with  the  delivery  of 
the  allegory  which  tend  to  suggest  its  second  sense. 

2d.  Peculiarities  in  the  structure  of  the  allegory 
which  have  the  same  efi'ect. 

Zd.  Partial  developments  which  it  makes  of  the 
second  j)icture. 


KEY   TO   THE    SECOND   SENSE.  183 

4:th.  The  laws  of  symbolic  representation. 

Mh.  The  symbols. 

These  means  are  all  valuable,  and  of  snch  a  nature 
that,  when  brought  to  bear  in  their  full  force,  they  can 
scarcely  fail  to  compass  the  solution  of  the  problem. 
The  limits  of  the  present  work  forbid  us  from  attempt- 
ing any  thing  more  than  the  application  of  the  three 
first.  These  means,  however,  will  be  destitute  of 
any  effectual  result  if  the  first  representation  be  not 
apprehended.  The  fact  that  this  condition  has  not 
been  fulfilled  in  respect  of  the  Revelation,  and  that 
the  first  representation  which  it  makes  has  not  hith- 
erto been  understood,  appears  to  us  to  have  been  the 
grand  barrier  in  the  way  of  its  successful  interpreta- 
tion. It  is  perfectly  clear,  for  example,  that  if  the 
allegory  has  been  regarded  as  one,  while  there  are 
two,  no  advance  could  ever  be  made  in  the  interpre- 
tation of  the  whole  book,  no  matter  how  efiicient  the 
above  means  of  elucidation  may  be.  The  second 
sense  would  stubbornly  refuse  to  discover  itself  in  the 
absence  of  the  first.  But  if  the  allegory  be  twofold, 
and  the  two  first  representations  which  it  makes  have 
been  apprehended,  we  are  then  on  the  ti^ach  at  least 
wdiicli  conducts  to  the  successful  issue.  We  have 
made  the  elementary  step  and  w^e  are  in  a  position  to 
bring  tlie  above  means  of  interpretation  to  bear  on 
the  solution  of  the  problem  with  their  full  and  legiti- 
mate effect.  "We  have  laid  the  foundation  upon 
which  the  superstructure  of  the  second  sense  may 
possibly  be  reared,  and  without  which  it  can  never  be 
reared. 


CHAPTEK  11. 

CIKCUMSTANCES    CONNECTED    WITH    THE    DELIVERY  OF    THE 
ALLEGOKY,     WHICH     TEND     TO     SUGGEST     THE     SECOND 

SENSE. 

It  Hsnally  occurs  that  there  are  certain  circura- 
st-ances  connected  with  the  delivery  of  an  allegory, 
which  have  a  tendency  to  point  out  the  second  and 
real  sense  of  it.  Let  us  take,  for  example,  the  alle- 
gorical dreams  of  the  butler  and  baker,  interpreted 
by  Joseph  in  the  Egyptian  prison : 

^'  And  the  chief  butler  told  his  dream  to  Joseph, 
and  said  unto  him,  In  my  dream,  behold,  a  vine  was 
before  me ;  and  in  the  vine  were  three  branches : 
and  it  was  as  though  it  budded,  and  her  blossoms 
shot  forth ;  and  the  clusters  thereof  brought  ripe 
grapes :  and  Pharaoh's  cup  was  in  my  hand ;  and  I 
took  the  grapes,  and  pressed  them  into  Pharaoh's 
cup,  and  I  gave  the  cup  into  Pharaoh's  hand." — Gen. 
xl.  9-11. 

"  When  the  chief  baker  saw  that  the  interpreta- 
tion was  good,  he  said  unto  Joseph,  I  also  was  in  my 
dream,  and  behold,  I  had  three  white  baskets  on  my 
head:  And  in  the  uppermost  basket  there  was  all 


SUGGESTIVE   CIRCUMSTANCES.  185 

manner  of  bake-meats  for  Pharaoh  ;  and  the  birds  did 
eat  them  out  of  the  basket  upon  my  head.— ch.  xk 

16,  IT. 

The  second  sense  of  these  allegories,  it  is  apparent, 
is  naturally  suggested  by  the  circumstances  in  which 
they  were  delivered,  viz.,  in  prison,  by  a  butler  and 
baker,  lying  under  the  king's  displeasure.  These  cir- 
cumstances together,  it  may  be,  with  others  not  re- 
corded, were  sufficient  to  awaken  the  mind  of  Joseph, 
who  was  endowed  with  a  superior  wisdom  by  God,  to 
the  real  sense. 

The  parable  of  the  good  Samaritan,  delivered  by 
Christ,  in  answer  to  the  question.  Who  is  my  neigh- 
bor? is  likewise  an  obvious  illustration  in  point. 
The  second  sense  is  plainly  perceptible  here,  from 
the  circumstance  that  the  allegory  is  an  answer  to 
the  above  question. 

]N'ow  there  are  some  circumstances  connected  with 
the  delivery  of  the  Kevelation,  which  throw  a  very 
considerable  light  on  the  real  sense  of  its  double 
allegory.     Of  these  the  most  prominent  are, 

1st.  The  title. 

M.  The  revealing  angel. 

3cl  The  dedication  of  the  book  to  the  seven 
churches. 

Let  us  collect  from  these  in  order,  the  light  they 
are  calculated  to  yield. 

Firstly,  in  regard  to  the  title,  it  is  given  as  "  The 
Eevelation  of  Jesus  Christ,  which  God  gave  unto 
him,  to  show  unto  his  servants,  things  which  must 
shortly   come   to   pass."  Rev.  i.  1.     It  is  apparent, 


186  SUGGESTIVE   CIRCUMSTANCES. 

from  these  words,  that  the  allegory  is  a  prophecy  of 
events^  "svhicli  it  is  natural  to  infer  concern  the  servants 
of  God.  This  then  determines  the  nature  of  the  alle- 
gory ;  it  does  not  foreshadow  dgctrines  or  spiritual 
truths,  but  "  things  to  come  to  pass,"  i.  e.  as  is  natu- 
rally to  be  understood,  it  predicts  events  about  to 
take  place  in  the  world's  history ;  it  has  obviously  to 
do  with  facts,  and  not  with  the  ijrincijples  of  action. 
It  does  not  move,  then ,  in  any  transcendental  region, 
but  it  shoots  forward  on  that  plain  matter  of  fact 
track  upon  which  history  is  afterwards  to  follow  it 
with  slow  and  measured  steps.  It  predicts  events  to 
happen,  the  decree  of  which  is  registered  in  heaven, 
"  things  which  must  come  to  pass." 

But  they  are  said  shortly  to  come  to  pass ;  a  qual- 
ification which  has  been  a  great  stuinbling-block  to 
many  an  interpreter,  and  also  to  many  an  ordinary 
reader.  It  has  been  this  in  two  respects.  In  the  first 
place,  the  prophecy  has  generally  been  applied  to 
events  which  do  not  shortly  come  to  pass,  which 
seems  to  be  a  contradiction  of  the  title.  In  the  second 
place,  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  Man  to  judgment,  is, 
as  appears  from  many  parts  of  the  book, -obviously 
the  main  event  predicted,  and  yet  this  is  not  an 
event  of  which  it  could  be  said  with  truth,  that  it 
"  must  shortly  come  to  pass."  The  title  thus  stands, 
apparently  in  contradiction  with  tlie  great  mass  of 
commentators  wlio  have  written  on  the  book,  and 
who  apply  it  to  events  which  do  not  shortly  come  to 
pass,  and  it  stands  in  contradiction  with  itself,  if  the 
literal  sense  of  the  words  be  taken,  for  the  princij)al 


SUGGESTIVE   CIECITMSTANCES.  187 

event  predicted  is  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  man  in 
judgment,  which  did  not  sliortly  come  to  pass.  The 
expUmation  whicli  is  rendered  of  this  apparent  con- 
tradiction, viz.,  that  the  meaning  is,  tliat  some  of  the 
events  will  shortly  come  to  pass,  or  that  the  train  of 
events  predicted  will  begin  shortly  to  move  on^  is  to 
many  minds  not  a  satisfactory  one.  It  cannot  be 
denied  that  a  certain  violation  is  done  to  the  natural 
import  of  language  by  this  explanation.  Still  it  is  by 
no  means  a  violation  of  truth,  for  it  is  sufficient  for 
the  correctness  of  the  statement,  that  some  of  the 
events  do  shortly  come  to  pass.  Yet  the  natural 
inference  is,  that  this  shortly  coming  to  pass  is  a 
characteristic  of  the  events,  and  as  such  it  is  not 
truly  a  characteristic.  If  the  expression  is  taken  as 
a  simple  statement,  involving  no  characteristic,  then 
the  explanation  is  a  perfectly  satisfactory  one.  It  is 
sufficient  for  truth,  that  some  of  the  events  shortly 
came  to  pass.  If  the  expression  be  regarded  as  neces- 
sarily containing  in  it  a  characteristic  of  the  events 
which  the  natural  sense  of  the  language  implies,  then 
the  explanation  is  not  a  satisfactory  one. 

It  appears  to  us  that  a  better  solution  of  this  diffi- 
culty may  be  rendered  in  this  manner.  This  is  essen- 
tially a  symbolical  book,  and  although  there  are  ex- 
pressions in  it  to  be  literally  taken,  it  is  only  where 
they  cannot  bear  a  symbolical  sense.  The  law  of  the 
book  is  the  symbolical  sense.  Even  where  literal 
language  in  the  most  absolute  manner  might  be  ex- 
pected, that  is,  in  the  case  of  a  formal  interjDretation 
rendered,  wx  find  even  here  a  symbolical  meaning 


188  SUGGESTIVE   CIRCUMSTANCES. 

attaclied  to  the  words  of  the  interpretation.  It  is 
evidently  not  the  intention  of  the  author  tliat  his 
expressions  should  be  measured  by  the  plumb-line 
of  literal  exactness.  If  this  rule  is  to  be  a2:)plied, 
what  sense  is  to  be  gathered  from  "Write  the  things 
which  thou  hast  seen,  and  the  things  which  are, 
and  the  things  wliich  shall  be  hereafter."  Ch.  i.  19. 
Does  not  the  prophet  here  mean  to  convey  symboli- 
cally the  idea  of  the  perfectness  of  his  prophecy,  by 
presenting  the  idea  of  absolute  time,  past,  present, 
and  future,  rather  than  to  give  a  literal  definition  of 
the  relative  position  in  respect  to  time  of  the  sights 
which  he  saw  ?  The  symbolical  conception  here  evi- 
dently moulds  and  governs  the  literal  phraseology, 
which  is  comparatively  vapid  and  meaningless  in 
its  purely  literal  acceptation.  In  the  same  manner  it 
may  be  held,  that  in  the  expression  "  things  which 
must  shortly  come  to  pass,"  the  prophet  has  a  special 
regard  to  the  fact,  that  his  prophecy  is  a  double  one, 
and  that  duplication  is  a  sign  attaclied  by  the  Spirit 
of  God  to  predictions  of  events  which  shortly  come  to 
pass.  Gen.  xli.  32.  The  conclusion  is  certainly  a 
legitimate  one,  that,  since  in  the  words  "  the  things 
which  thou  hast  seen,  and  the  things  which  are, 
and  the  things  which  shall  be  hereafter,"  the 
prophet  expresses  the  ]}eTfeGtness  of  his  ^^rophec}^,  he 
intimates  in  the  words  "  things  wliich  must  shortly 
come  to  pass,"  the  duplication  of  it.  In  this  view  of 
his  words,  which  is  founded  on  the  analogy  drawn 
from  his  own  expression,  these  words  will  naturally 
rather  express  the  duplication,  than  serve  to  express 


SUGGESTIVE   CIRCUMSTANCES.  189 

tlie  actual  speediness  of  the  fulfilment  of  tlie  events. 
As  tlie  one  clause  clearly  develops  no  more  than  the 
perfectness  of  the  prophecy,  so  the  other  may  be 
Iield  to  express  nothing  more  than  the  duplication 
of  it. 

But  there  is  another  consideration  which  entirely 
overthrows  the  literal  acceptation  of  the  language  in 
this  case.  As  a  general  rule,  God  speaks  to  man  more 
Jiumaiio,  else  He  would  not  be  understood.  This  is 
undoubtedly  His  reason  for  so  speaking.  But  if  it  can 
be  shown  that  he  designs  not  to  be  understood,  then 
an  exceptional  case  is  opened  up  for  the  sense  of  lan- 
guage, and  we  are  then  at  liberty  to  judge  it  not  more 
humano^  but  more  divmo.  This  is  unquestionably  that 
mode  of  speaking  which  belongs  to  the  Deity  and  the 
other  is  simply  an  accommodation  to  the  necessities 
of  the  creature.  Now  of  God's  relations  to  time,  we 
are  more  than  once  advised  in  the  book.  He  is  "  the 
Lord  which  is,  and  which  was,  and  which  is  to  come, 
the  Almighty  : "  He  is  "  He  that  liveth  and  was 
dead  ;  and  behold,  I  am  alive  for  evermore,  Amen." 
Ch.  i.  8,  18.  In  regard  to  the  mode  in  which  periods 
of  time  are  contemplated  by  him,  we  are  told,  in 
another  part  of  Scripture,  that  "  one  day  is  with  the 
Lord  as  a  tliousand  years,  and  a  thousand*  years  as 
one  day."  It  is  obvious,  then,  that  if  there  is  ground 
to  believe  that  the  present  forms  an  exceptional  case 
in  which  He  is  to  be  held  as  speaking  more  divino, 
the  expression  "  things  which  must  shortly  come  to 
pass,"  cannot  convey  any  idea  to  the  mind  of  man, 
in  so  far  as  the  question  of  time  is  concerned,  nor 


190  SUGGESTIVE   CIECTJMSTANCES. 

could  tliej  have  been  designed  to  do  it.  But  if  the 
coming  of  tlie  Son  of  man  to  judgment  is  the  prin- 
cipal event  of  the  prophecy,  which  cannot  be  denied, 
then  no  revelation  can  be  made  in  regard  to  the  time 
of  its  falfilment,  since  in  this  case  the  prophecy 
mainly  concerns  an  event  which,  by  a  positive  affir- 
mation of  Scripture,  is  excluded  from  the  ken  of  man. 
Matt.  xxiv.  36.  It  may  be  said  there  are  definite 
measurements  of  time  in  the  prophecy.  Unquestion- 
ably there  are,  but  these  have  been  shrouded  in  as 
much  secrecy  as  that  which  we  hold  attaches  to 
these  words.  They  have  been  couched  in  symbols, 
unintelligible  till  after  the  revelations  made  were  ful- 
filled. Accordingly,  in  consequence  of  tlie  nature  of 
the  siohject  of  the  prophecy,  all  characterization  of  it 
as  being  of  "  things  which  must  shortly  come  to  pass," 
is  excluded,  and  the  Spirit  of  God  is  to  be  held  as 
using  these  w^ords  more  divino^  in  an  exceptional  w^ay, 
demanded  by  the  nature  of  the  case.  It  is,  indeed, 
sufficiently  clear,  that  the  prophecy  can  make  no 
revelation  in  regard  to  a  matter  wdiich  is  excluded  in 
another  part  of  Scripture  from  revelation.  But  if 
these  w^ords  are  to  be  taken  literally,  they  do  make 
such  a  revelation.  Their  literal  sense,  accordingly, 
must  be  'rejected  on  this  ground.  They  therefore 
must  have  a  symbolic  sense,  since  they  must  have 
some  meaning ;  and  it  is  not  easy  to  see  what  other 
symbolic  sense  they  can  have,  except  that  of  express- 
ing that  the  prophec}'"  is  a  double  one.  Duplication 
is  a  sign  of  events  shortly  coming  to  pass.  Gen.  xli. 
32.     The  sign  and  the  thing  signified  necessarily  cor- 


SUGGESTIVE   CIECIJMSTANCES.  191 

respond,  and  are  convertible.  Their  relative  positions 
may  be  changed,  and  the  thing  signified  by  the  sign 
in  one  case,  may  become  the  sign  itself  in  another. 
If  dnplication  is  descriptive  of  events  shortly  coming 
to  pass,  the  attribution  of  events  shortly  coming  to 
pass,  may  be  equally  descriptive  of  reduplication. 
The  words,  then,  may  be  understood  as  simply  con- 
veying the  sense  that  the  prophecy  is  a  double  one, 
just  as  the  words  above  referred  to  convey  the  sense 
that  it  is  aj?6?yt^<?^  one. 

Secondly,  the  revealing  angel  throws  some  light 
upon  the  second  sense  of  the  allegory.  The  Revela- 
tion was  sent  and  signified  to  John  by  the  angel  of 
God,  ch.  i.  1,  who,  as  we  learn  afterwards,  was  tlie 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  himself,  whose  the  revelation  is 
said  to  be.  He  is  doubtless  called  the  angel,  from 
the  circumstance  of  his  having  been  sent  by  God, 
and  his  appearance  to  John  in  vision.  The  phrase- 
ology, however,  would  entitle  us  to  believe  that  there 
•was  no  actual  personal  appearance  of  the  Saviour, 
but  simply  a  manifestation  in  vision,  else  why  is  such 
language  used  as  "  he  sent  and  signified  it  by  Ms 
angel  unto  his  servant  John,  when  Christ's  name  had 
been  already  employed.  From  the  fact,  then,  as  it 
may  be  held  to  be,  that  Christ  is  the  revealing  angel, 
and  that  the  revelation  is  said  to  be  his,  the  conclu- 
sion is  to  be  drawn,  that  the  revelation  will  bear  spe- 
cial reference  to  that  which  it  was  his  grand  commis- 
sion on  earth  to  perform.  This  was  to  found  and  set 
up  the  kingdom  of  God.  It  is  to  be  inferred  that  the 
prophetic  allegory  delivered  by  the  Saviour,  will  de- 


192  SUGGESTIVE   CIRCUMSTANCES. 

velop  tlie  course  of  events  wliicli  conduct  to  this  grand 
consummation. 

Tliirdlj,  the  dedication  to  the  seven  churches 
throws  light  in  regard  to  the  nature  of  the  revelation 
addressed  to  them.  The  sevenfold  number  imports  a 
dedication  to  the  whole  church  of  God.  In  the 
seven  epistles,  this  whole  church  is  animated,  in  stir- 
ring w^ordsj  to  press  on  to  victory.  Each  of  them 
breathes  the  one  animating  strain.  It  is  a  legitimate 
conclusion,  that  the  victory  of  the  church  of  God  and 
of  Christ,  its  head  and  king,  w^ill  be  the  burden  of  the 
prophecy,  w^hich  is  thus  dedicated. 

This  conclusion  connects  the  subject  of  the  Reve- 
lation with  that  of  Dan.  chs.  ii.  and  vii.,  who  predicts 
of  the  final  victory  of  the  saints.  As  according  to 
Daniel,  this  victory  is  achieved  over  tlie  fourth  and 
last  of  the  great  world-dominions,  the  Eoman,  it  fol- 
lows that  the  relations  of  the  kingdom  of  God  to  this 
fourth  dominion  will  be  one,  if  not  the  whole,  subject 
of  the  Revelation.  But  as  unity  of  conception  is 
a  fundamental  law  of  the  allegory,  it  appears  a  legiti- 
mate conclusion  that  it  will  be  the  whole  subject  of  it. 
If  any  other  were  introduced,  it  would  conflict  at 
once  with  that  unity  which  characterizes  the  whole 
of  Scriptural  prophecy  and  with  the  unity  of  the  al; 
legory  itself,  which  cannot  be  impaired.  Accordingl}^, 
we  are  led  to  conclude,  both  from  the  sending  of  the 
epistles  and  the  terms  in  which  they  are  couched,  that 
the  contest  of  the  kingdom  of  God  for  preeminence 
and  victory  over  the  fourth  dominion  of  the  world, 
the  Roman,  will  be  the  burden  of  the  revelation 


SUGGESTIVE  CIRCUMSTANCES.  193 

made.  This  subject  must  be  one  subject  in  it.  It  is 
a  legitimate  conclusion  tliat  it  ^\  ill  form  the  whole 
subject  of  it. 

We  thus  derive,  from  a  consideration  of  the  cir- 
cumstances attending  the  delivery  of  the  prophecy, 
no  small  light  in  regard  to  the  sense  it  bears. 
9 


CHAPTEE    III. 

SPECIAL  FEATURE  EN"  THE  STRUCTURE  OF  THE  PROPHECY. 

Before  proceeding  to  collect  those  rays  of  light, 
clear  and  elucidating  as  they  will  be  found  to  be, 
which  the  introduction  of  the  subject  by  the  Four 
Living-creatures  throws  upon  the  second  sense  of  the 
Revelation,  it  will  be  necessary  to  analyze  the  symbol 
itself  which  performs  this  very  important  office. 
These  Living-creatures  throw  light  not  only  on  the 
structicre  but  also  on  the  subject  of  the  projDliecy.  It 
will  be  found  that  they  prove  the  structure  to  be 
quaternal ;  and  that  the  subject  i^four  great  jpolitical 
dominions^  three  of  which  are  hostile  to  the  hingdom 
of  God. 

These  are  evidently  most  important  points  in  the 
interpretation  ;  they  may  be  regarded  as  two  great 
foci  of  light.  The  one  illuminates  the  structure  of  the 
prophecy,  showing  it  to  be  quaternal ;  the  other  af- 
fords that  one  idea  which,  as  it  has  been  shown,  is  a 
main  and  efficient  clue  to  the  discovery  of  the  sense 
of  an  allegory. 

They  are  beacons  of  light  which  send  their  stream- 
ing rays  through  the  darkness  of  enigma ;  but  they 


SPECIAL  FEATURE  OF  THE  PROrHECY.      195 

are  beacons,  the  existence  of  wliich  has  not  been 
known ;  hence  the  interpretation  has  been  shipwreck- 
ed. The  quaternal  structure  of  the  prophecy  has  not 
been  seen  ;  the  unity  of  design,  which  at  once  marks 
and  defines  the  whole  plan  of  the  prophecy,  has  not 
been  apprehended ;  the  complexity  of  its  materials 
has  not  been  reduced  to  that  state  of  simplicity  which 
is  requisite  to  interpretation.  These  are  important 
things  which  have  not  been  done  and  which  must  be 
done ;  they  are  of  such  im23ortance  that,  without 
them,  the  interpretation  of  the  book  is  impossible. 
The  double  allegory,  the  apprehension  of  which  is  the 
indispensable  first  step  to  the  interpretation,  is  itself 
a  necessary  corollary  from  that  quaternal  structure, 
which  is  demonstratively  proved  by  the  introduction 
made  by  the  Living-creatures.  If  the  subject  mani- 
fests a  fourfold  division  it  is  twice  delivered ;  for  if 
not,4:liere  is  a  division  of  it  into  eight,  which  is  im- 
]30ssible,  since  the  Living-creatures  divide  it  into 
four.  It  is  accordingly  a  matter  of  no  small  moment 
to  observe  and  to  study  the  lesson  which  they  teach 
ns.  The  Living-creatures  have  been  thought  to  be 
mere  ornamental  appendages  of  the  book ;  they  are 
most  important  agents  in  the  development  of  its 
plan. 

They  are  agents  in  developing  the  subject  of  the 
prophecy  in  two  ways,  and  it  will  be  requisite  to  con- 
sider them  under  the  two  aspects  in  which  they  ap- 
pear. They  act,  first  of  all,  as  a  member  of  one  com- 
pound symbol,  which  consists  of  the  Four  and  Twenty 
Elders  and  themselves  combined.     This  is  one  aspect 


196  ELDERS   AND   THE  LIVING-CEEATUEES. 

whicli  they  present.  But  tliey  have  a  second  and  a 
more  important  one  in  so  far  as  its  bearing  on  the 
structure  and  design  of  the  prophecy  is  concerned. 
They  act  independently  as  heralds  or  introducers  of 
the  subject,  saying  to  the  prophet,  "  come  and  see  " 
four  representations  of  it  which  are  made.  It  is  in 
this  official  capacity  as  heralds  of  the  subject  that 
the  Living-creatures  demand  special  attention.  They 
point  out  the  unity  in  design  of  the  subject  they  an- 
nounce; the  quaternal  structure  of  it;  the  twofold 
representation  of  it ;  and,  what  is  most  important  of 
all,  they  define  it  to  be  of  such  a  nature  that  the  ap 
plication  of  the  prophecy,  which  is  thus  limited  within 
a  very  small  compass,  becomes  a  matter  of  compara- 
tive facility.  They  may  be  truly,  then,  regarded  as 
much  in  the  light  of  interpreters  as  of  heralds. 

It  will  be  necessary,  in  order  to  obtain  a  full 
view  of  the  import  and  significance  of  the  symbol, 
and  to  acquire  the  full  benefits  which  it  is  designed 
to  confer  on  the  interpretation,  to  consider  it  under 
each  of  the  twofold  aspects  which  it  presents,  which 
are  that  of  a  compound  and  a  simple  symbol. 

The  Compound  Sy:mbol  the  Four  and  Twenty  El- 
ders AND  THE  Four  Living-creatures. 

The  Eevelation  itself  gives  the  meaning  of  this 
compound  symbol  clearly  and  explicitl3^  This  is 
done  in  ch.  iv.  8,  9.  It  is  accordingly  unnecessary 
to  refer  to  other  Scripture  to  ascertain  the  significa- 
tion it  bears  in  this  book. 


ELDERS   AND   THE   LIVING-CREATURES.  197 

It  will,  however,  be  a  matter  not  alone  of  interest 
but  of  utility  to  trace  the  etymology,  as  it  may  be 
called,  of  the  two  component  parts  of  the  symbol,  the 
sense  of  which  in  its  composite  form  we  certainly 
know.  An  investigation  of  this  kind  will  materially 
illustrate  and  enhance,  while  it  cannot  alter  the  sig- 
nification of  it.  The  investigation  will  also  open  up 
to  us  a  beautiful  exhibition  of  that  unity  of  the 
Divine  Mind  which  breathes  through  the  whole  of 
the  inspired  record.  It  will  unite  Genesis  with  the 
Revelation  in  one  concatenation  ;  it  will  connect  the 
first  and  the  last  book  of  Scripture  in  the  perfect  har- 
mony of  one  design.  Such  a  manifestation  can  be  of 
no  slight  importance  and  interest  to  the  Christian. 
But  especially  it  will  enable  us  to  prosecute  with 
every  prospect  of  success  that  farther  inquiry  which 
is  in  reserve,  and  which  is  of  the  highest  importance 
in  the  interpretation  of  the  prophecy,  namely,  the  true 
sense  and  import  of  the  symbol  the  Four  Living- 
creatures,  as  announcing  heralds  of  the  subject. 

The  compound  symbol,  as  it  stands,  resolves  itself 
into  two  members — the  Four  and  Twenty  Elders  and 
the  Four  Living-creatures.  Let  us  direct  our  atten- 
tion to  the  Living-creatures  firstly,  since  performing 
as  they  do  an  important  function  indej^endent  of  the 
Elders,  their  bearing  on  the  prophecy  is  the  more 
important. 

In  regard  to  the  "  four  beasts,"  let  us  premise  that 
it  is  a  mistranslation  of  the  Greek.  Tliere  are  strictly 
speaking  no  leasts  at  all  in  the  Revelation.  Our 
English  word  beast  in  its  primary  and  real  sense  indi- 


198  ELDEES   AND   THE   LIVING-CEEATUKES. 

cates  no  moral  qualities  whatever.  The  Greek 
OypLov,  as  applied  to  the  Ten-horned  ^aud  Two-horned 
Beasts  would  be  properly  rendered  wild  heast.  This 
expresses  the  force  of  the  original,  which  is  to  the 
effect  that  the  animal  is  untamed  and  noxious.  The 
Ten-horned  "Wild  Beast  and  the  Two-horned  Wild 
Beast  would  then  be  a  correct  rendering,  and  would 
convey  the  spirit  of  the  original.  The  Greeli  word 
Zwa,  applied  to  the  living-creatures,  has  a  widely 
different  significance,  and  expresses,  etymologically 
viewed,  simply  the  idea  of  life.  As  used  by  John 
it  is  unquestionably  as  literal  a  translation  as  could 
be  rendered  from  the  one  language  into  the  other  of 
the  Hebrew  ni^n  of  Ezeldel,  ch.  i.  5,  etc.  This 
expression  is  correctly  rendered  in  the  common 
version,  "  the  living-creatures."  It  is  sufficiently  sur- 
prising tliat  our  translators,  generally  judicious, 
should  have  descended  in  the  Bevelation  to  the 
translation  untasteful,  inelegant,  and  incorrect,  of 
"  the  four  beasts."  This  designation  certainly  ought 
to  be  expunged,  as  it  affords  no  conception  of  the 
real  meaning,  while  that  of  the  four  "living  ones" 
or  "  living-creatures  "  ought  to  be  substituted  in  the 
room  of  it. 

When  we  examine  the  w^ord  then  in  the  Greek 
and  in  the  Hebrew  of  Ezekiel,  from  which  it  has  been 
transferred,  we  find  that  the  idea  of  life  is  that  which 
it  embodies.  The  older  designation  which  appears 
in  Gen.,  ch.  iii.  2-i,  and  elsewhere  applied  to  these 
"living  ones,"  and  rendered  the  clieTubi^n^  the  deri- 
vation of  which  in  the  original  is  uncertain,  throws 


ELDERS   AND  THE  LIVING- CEEATURES.  199 

no  additional  light  on  the  sense.*  The  ground-idea  of 
the  symbol  then  is  life.  This  view  of  the  sense  is 
corroborated  by  an  analysis  of  the  symbol.  Tlie 
cherubim  or  the  living  creatures,  for  both  the  designa- 
tions are  strictly  synonymous,  constitute  an  assem- 
blage of  the  highest  forms  of  organic  life.  They  con- 
tain the  faces  of  the  lion,  the  ox,  the  man  and  the 
eagle,  while  the  man  is  to  be  regarded  from  the 
description,  as  forming  the  principal  part  of  the  body 
of  this  great  representative  of  life.  The  lion  has 
been  regarded  by  all  nations  as  the  "  king  of  beasts," 
and  it  is  spoken  of  in  Scripture  as  such.  The  ox  was 
regarded  by  all  the  nations  of  antiquity  as  the  sym- 
bol of  creative  or  productive  power.  Its  connection 
with  the  pursuits  of  husbandry,  or  producing  from 
the  ground,  naturally  led  to  this  association  of  it.  It  is 
accordingly  the  form  which  has  been  taken  by  idola- 
trous nations  in  ancient  and  modern  times  for  worship- 
ping God  as  Creator.  Man,  the  third  figure,  inferior 
to  many  of  the  animals  in  physical  qualities,  is  su- 
perior to  them  all  in  intelligence,  and  represents  the 
highest  form  of  intelligent  life.  The  eagle  is  what 
the  lion  is  among  quadrupeds,  the  king  of  birds. 
There  is  thus  equally  in  the  name  of  the  symbol  and 
in  the  forms  which  it  develops  an  exhibition  of  the 
idea  of  life.  The  characteristics  also  unfolded  of  the 
cherubim  are  entirely  in  unison  with  this  view  of  it. 
They  are  said  to  "rest  not  day  and  night,"  Kev. 
iv.  8 ;  they  move  "  as  a  flash  of  lightning,"  Ezek. 
i.  14 ;  they  are  "  full  of  eyes,"  which  more  than  any 
other  part  of  the  body  express  the  presence  of  life, 
*  Fairbairn's  Typology. 


200  ELDERS   AND  THE  LIYING-CEEATUEES. 

wliicli  are  frequently  applied  in  this  sense  tlirougliout 
Scripture,  and  wliicli  by  Christ  are  said  to  be  an  in- 
dex of  spiritual  life,  Luke  xi.  34.  The  idea,  then,  em- 
bodied by  the  living-creatures,  is  life.  But  the  life 
which  is  meant  cannot  be  animal  but  spiritual  life. 
This  is  sufficiently  evident  from  the  presence  of  the 
symbol  in  heaven,  from  the  various  applications  made 
of  it  throughout  Scrij)ture,  and  more  especially  from 
the  association  of  it  with  God  himself,  as  the  upbearer 
of  his  throne,  who  is  a  spirit. 

But  there  is  a  farther  idea  developed  in  the  sym- 
bol than  that  of  life,  which  is  thus  to  be  held  to  be 
spiritual  life.  The  number  indicates  a  certain  restric- 
tion in  this  general  and  comprehensive  idea  of 
spiritual  life  which  it  bears.  The  living-creatures  are 
four  in  number.  But/bi^r  is  the  number  or  signature 
of  dominion.  The  two  ideas  then  of  life  and  do- 
minion must  be  combined  to  ascertain  the  full  import 
of  the  symbol.  This  being  done  it  embodies  the  do- 
oninion  of  sjnritical  life.  This  is  without  doubt  the 
true  significance  of  the  symbol. 

It  has  been  held  by  many  that  the  cherubim  were 
actual  beings.  This  opinion  is  now  generally  aban- 
doned. They  appear  in  Scripture  in  variable  forms, 
which  of  itself  affords  conclusive  evidence  that  they 
are  not  any  real  beings.  Thus  the  cherubim  seen 
by  Ezekiel,  i.  6,  had  four  faces  and  four  wings,  but 
those  described  by  him  on  the  walls  of  the  temple, 
ch.  xli.  18, 19,  had  only  two  faces.  The  cherubim  at 
each  end  of  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  as  described  in 
Exod.  xxv.  20,  look  upon  each  other  and  toward  the 


ELDEKS   AKD   THE  LIYING-CREATUKES.  201 

mercy  seat  so  that  tliej  could  not  have  had  more  than 
two  faces.  The  chernbim  of  the  ark  and  of  the  veil 
were  probably  somewhat  different  from  each  other, 
the  one  being  represented  as  solid  figures,  and  the 
other  as  paintings  on  the  vail.  The  cherubim  of 
Isaiah  have  only  four  wings,  while  those  of  Ezekiel 
and  John  have  six  wings.  "Wlieels  are  spoken  of  in 
connection  with  them  in  Ezekiel,  and  nowhere  else. 
These  variations  in  the  form  were  in  all  probability 
purposely  designed  to  guard  against  their  being  look- 
ed upon  as  real  beings,  and  thus  raised  to  an  object 
of  worship.  They  are  purely  symbols,  then,  and  it 
has  been  seen  what  they  symbolize. 

There  are  only  two  local  habitations  assigned  to 
the  cherubim  in  Scripture.  These  are  the  garden  of 
Eden  and  the  throne  of  God.  The  idea  of  the  do- 
minion of  life  spiritual,  is  one  entirely  harmonious 
with  both  positions.  In  the  garden  of  Eden  they  were 
placed  after  the  fall  to  keep  with  a  flaming  sword, 
which  turned  in  every  direction,  the  way  of  the  tree 
of  life.  "We  thus  see  the  dominion  or  power  of  life 
represented  as  the  guarding  tlie  tree  of  life.  There 
is  another  but  a  highly  figurative  association  of  the 
cherubim  with  Eden  in  Ezekiel.  It  occurs  in  ch. 
xxviii.  The  prophet  addre&ses  the  king  of  Tyre  in 
the  following  words :  "  Thou  hast  been  in  Eden,  the 
garden  of  God,"  and  "  thou  art  the  anointed  cherub 
that  covereth ;  and  I  have  set  thee  so ;  thou  wast 
upon  the  holy  mountain  of  God;  thou  hast  walked 
up  and  down  in  the  midst  of  the  stones  of  fire."  It 
is  evident,  that  here  the  word  cherub  is  used  as  a 
9* 


202  ELDEKS   AND   THE   LIVING-CREATUEES. 

figure  and  applied  to  the  king  of  Tyre  simply  on  tlie 
ground  that  he  stood  in  the  highest  position  of  crea- 
ture-life and  enjoyment.  It  is  to  be  noted,  however, 
that  cherub  is  here  associated  with  Eden. 

Wherever  the  cherubim  or  living-creatures  are 
elsewhere  mentioned,  they  appear  in  immediate  con- 
nection with  the  throne  of  God.  Moses,  for  example, 
was  commanded  to  make  a  cherub  at  each  end  of  the 
ark  of  the  covenant.  "  There,"  said  God,  "  will  I  meet 
with  thee,  and  I  will  commune  with  thee  from  above 
the  mercy-seat  from  between  the  two  cherubims 
which  are  upon  the  ark  of  the  testimony  of  all  things, 
which  I  will  give  thee  in  commandment  to  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel."  Ex.  xxv.  22.  Hence  God  is  in 
many  places  called  the  God  that  dwelleth  or  sitteth 
between  the  cherubims,  which  sitting  between  the 
cherubims,  as  appears  from  a  comparison  of  Ps.  ix. 
4,  and  1  Kings  xxii.  19,  has  the  same  meaning  as  sit- 
ting upon  the  throne.  Thus,  in  Ps.  xviii.  10,  it  is 
said  of  God,  that  he  "  rode  on  a  cherub  and  did  fly." 
In  Ezekiel  we  are  told  that  the  glory  of  the  Lord  is 
above  the  cherubim. 

Such  is  the  application  of  the  symbol  in  the  Old 
Testament.  In  the  Kevelation  the  cherubim  are 
represented  as  in  the  midst  of  the  throne  and  round, 
about  it,  a  mode  of  expression  from  wdiich  it  is  to  be 
•understood  that  they  bore  up  the  throne,  probably 
curving  with  their  forms  round  about  it. 

In  regard  to  the  four-and- twenty  elders,  it  is  to  be 
observed,  that  this  body  is  not  to  be  found  applied  as 
a  symbol  anywhere  else  in  Scripture,  nor  indeed  do 


ELDERS   AND   THE   LIVING*  CKEATUEES. 


203 


we  find  sucli  a  body  actually  existing.     The  symbol, 
however,  may  have  taken  its  origin  from  the  division 
by  David  of  the  Levitical  priests  into   twenty-four 
classes  (1  Chron.  xxiv.  3-19,  compare  Luke  i.  5),  each 
of  which  had  a  head,  which  in  their  totality  would  num- 
ber twenty-four.     It  is  held  by  some  to  be  forpied  by 
a  combination  of  the  twelve  patriarchs  and  the  twelve 
apostles.     This   latter  would   give  a  fuller  meaning 
and  a  sense  more  in  harmony  with  the  style  of  the 
Apocalypse.     Ch.  xxi.  12,  14.     It  would  express  the 
union  of  the   Jewish  and  Christian  economies   into 
one,  in   the  triumphant  Kingdom   of  God.     It  is  a 
matter  of  no   essential  moment  which  origin  be  as- 
sumed, as  neither  will  change  nor  add  very  material- 
Iv  to  the  sense. 

Such  is  the  amount  of  what  we  know  in  regard 
to  the  history,  and  what  may  be  called  the  etymology 
of  the  compound  symbol,  the  Elders  and  the  Living- 
creatures,  of  the  precise  signification  of  whicli  in  the 
Eevelation  we  are  informed. 

The  Eevelation  itself  interprets  it,  so  that  we  are 
in  no  doubt  in  regard  to  the  sense  it  bears  in  this 
book.  In  ch.  V.  S-10  it  is  said,  upon  the  Lamb's  tak- 
ing the  Seven-Sealed  Book,  ''the  four  beasts  and 
four-and-twenty  elders  fell  down  before  the  Lamb, 
having  every  one  of  them  harps  and  golden  vials 
full  of  odors,  which  are  the  prayers  of  saints.  And 
they  sung  a  new  song,  saying.  Thou  art  worthy  to 
take  the  book  and  to  open  the  seals  thereof;  for  thou 
wast  slain,  and  hast  redeemed  us  to  God  by  thy  blood 
out  of  every  kindred,  and  tongue,  and  people,  and  na- 


204:  ELDEES   AND   THE   LIVING-CEEATUEES. 

tion ;  and  bast  made  us  unto  our  God  kings  and 
priests :  and  we  (that  is,  tlie  living-creatures  and  tlie 
.elders)  shall  reign  on  the  earth."  From  these  woi'ds 
it  is  evident  that  tlie  livin.cr-creatures  and  the  elders 
conjointly  represent  the  saints,  for  they  alone  have 
been  r^eemed  by  Christ,  and  they  alone  are  destined 
to  reign  on  the  earth. 

We  thus  perceive  wliat  is  the  meaning  in  the 
Revelation  of  this  compound  symbol,  for  such  it 
evidently  is.  It  symbolizes  the  dominion  of  the 
kingdom  of  God  in  this  world,  for  the  living-creatures 
and  the  elders  "shall  reis-n  on  the  earth." 

In  examining  the  symbol  thus  explained,  let  us 
regard  it  in  two  lights  : 

\8t.  In  regard  to  the  offices  it  discharges,  for  such 
is  the  economy  of  Scriptural  representation,  that  a 
symbol  is  made  to  perform  duties. 

2(:Z.  In  regard  to  the  strictly  symbolic  purposes  it 
serves. 

The  first  great  office  wliicli  the  living-creatures 
and  the  elders  discharge,  is  to  minister  to  the  glory 
of  God.  The  former  bear  up  the  throne  of  the 
Eternal,  and  carry  him  whithersoever  he  wills.  The 
Elders  sit  as  counsellors,  and  stand  round  about  his 
throne.  They  are  both  engaged  in  the  worship  of 
God.  The  living-creatures  "  rest  not  day  and  night, 
saying.  Holy,  holy.  Lord  God  Almighty,  which  was, 
and  is,  and  is  to  come."  Of  the  elders,  it  is  said  that 
they  "  fall  down  before  him  that  sat  on  the  throne, 
and  worship  him  that  liveth  for  ever  and  ever,  and 
cast  their  crowns  before    the   throne,  saying,  Thou 


ELDERS   AND   THE  LIVING-CREATUEES.  205 

art  worthy,  O  Lord,  to  receive  glory  and  honor  and 
power ;  for  thou  hast  created  all  things,  and  for  thy 
pleasure  they  are  and  were  created."  Upon  the 
Lamb's  taking  the  book,  in  ch.  v.,  they  fall  down  be- 
fore him  in  like  manner  as  they  have  done  to  the 
Father,  thus  plainly  proving  his  essential  equality  ; 
and  they  sing  his  praise  as  their  Eedeeming  God. 
There  are  no  words  in  the  Bible  which  so  distinctly 
express  the  perfect  union  of  the  Son  with  the  Father, 
as  does  this  action  performed,  unless  it  be  the  words 
at  the  end  of  the  book,  "  the  throne  of  God  and  of  the 
Lamb."  Upon  the  angels  and  all  creation  ascribing 
glory  to  the  Lamb,  the  four  living-creatures  end 
the  triumphal  song  with  a  solemn  "  Amen,"  and 
"  the  four  and  twenty  elders  fall  down  and  worship 
him  that  liveth  for  ever  and  ever."  Upon  the  sound- 
ing of  the  seventh  trumpet,  it  is  said  there  were  great 
voices  in  heaven,  which  may  be  held  to  be  the  voices 
of  the  four  living-creatures,  saying,  ''  The  kingdoms 
of  this  world  are  become  the  kingdoms  of  our  Lord 
and  of  his  Christ ;  and  he  shall  reign  for  ever  and 
ever.  Upon  which  the  four  and  twenty  elders,  which 
sat  before  God  on  their  seats,  fell  upon  their  faces  and 
worshipped  God."  Upon  the  occasion  of  the  judg- 
ment of  the  great  Whore  being  consummated,  which 
corrupted  the  earth  with  her  fornication,  and  shed  the 
blood  of  the  saints,  "  the  four  living-creatures,  and 
the  four  and  twenty  elders,  fell  down  and  worshipped 
God  that  sat  on  the  throne,  saying.  Amen :  Alleluia." 
The  second  office  which  the  living-creatures  and 
elders  discharge,  is  ministering  to  the  saints.     When 


206  ELDEES   AND   THE   LIYING-CEEATUEES. 

John  weeps  because  no  man  was  found  "  worthy  to 
open  and  to  read  the  book,  neither  to  look  thereon," 
one  of  the  elders  approaclies  and  comforts  him,  tell- 
ing him  that  "  the  Lion  of  the  tribe  of  Jndah,  the  root 
of  David,  hath  prevailed  to  open  the  book,  and  to 
loose  the  seven  seals  thereof."  Again,  one  of  tlie 
elders  explains  to  the  prophet  who  these  are  "  which 
are  arrayed  in  white  robes,"  and  "  whence  they  com-e." 
"When  the  seven  angels  receive  their  commission  to 
ponr  out  the  vials  of  the  wrath  of  God  npon  the  earth, 
the  last  plagnes,  which  like  the  plagnes  of  Egypt  are 
to  deliver  God's  people  out  of  the  hand  of  their  ene- 
mies, it  is  one  of  the  four  living-creatures  which  gives 
"  unto  the  seven  angels  seven  golden  vials  full  of  the 
wrath  of  God."  Upon  the  opening  of  the  seven-sealed 
book,  the  four  living-creatures  in  order  invite  John 
to  "  Come  and  see "  the  four  first  pictures  in  this 
book ;  a  special  office  which,  as  it  has  a  highly  im- 
j)ortant  bearing  on  the  plan  of  the  prophecy,  we  pro- 
pose to  observe  more  narrowly. 

Such  are  the  offices  which  the  two  members  of 
the  compound  symbol  respectively  discharge. 

The  main  purpose,  however,  of  the  appearance  of 
these  Living-creatures  and  Elders  in  this  heavenly 
vision,  is  unquestionably  the  symbolic  end  they 
serve.  We  have  seen  what  this  is,  from  the  words  of 
the  song  which  they  jointly  sing.  They  plainly  stand 
for  the  saints  triumphant.  This  is  nothing  else  than 
spiritual  life  triumphant,  for  man  having  been  de- 
signed by  God,  in  his  pristine  condition,  to  "  have 


ELDEES   AND   THE   LIYING-CREATURES.  207 

dominion,"  his  investitnre  with  spiritnal  life,  involves 
in  it  tlie  triumph  of  spiritual  life  on  the  earth. 

"VYe  Jiave  already  traced  this  idea  of  spiritual  life 
in  the  Four  Living-creatures.  Tliey  are  an  embodi- 
ment of  the  highest  forms  of  organic  life  ;  they  neces- 
sarily symbolize  spiritual  life,  and  they  prefigure,  as 
is  to  be  inferred  from  their  fourfold  character,  the  do- 
minion of  it. 

Tlie  offices  "which  they  perform  are  expressive  of 
the  same  symbolic  sense.  It  is  with  the  same  signifi- 
cance attached  to  the  action,  that  they  are  represent- 
ed as  guarding  with  the  flaming  sword,  and  defend- 
ing against  fallen  and  spiritually  dead  man,  the  way 
in  Eden  to  the  "  tree  of  life." 

In  the  administration  of  the  covenant  of  works 
formally  made  through  Moses,  they  appear  on  the  ark 
of  the  covenant  looking  towards  the  mercy-seat,  sym- 
bolizing that  the  way  to  eternal  life  is  being  opened 
lip  through  the  Mosaic  ritual,  which  ritual  in  all  its 
observances  points  to  the  Lamb  slain  from  the  foun- 
dation of  the  world,  that  takes  away  from  man  the 
curse  of  death,  restores  to  him  Eden,  from  entrance 
into  which  these  very  cherubim  debarred  him  until 
his  title  should  be  made  good — Eden,  from  which  he 
was  driven  out  and  which  the  cherubim  guarded,  and 
opens  up  to  him  anew  the  way  to  the  tree  of  life. 
These  Living-creatures  we  behold  associated  with  the 
appearance  and  bearing  the  throne  of  God,  who  is  a 
spirit,  whether  this  descends  in  a  calm  atmosphere,  as 
to  Isaiah  and  Ezekiel,  or  whether  as  to  the  psalmist  it 
makes  way  on  the  wings  of  the  wind  and  the  Lord 


208  ELDERS   AND  THE  LIVING-CEEATUEES. 

God  rides  on  a  clierub  and  does  fly.  But  it  is  to  this 
same  spiritual  life  that  Christ,  the  Kedeemer,  when  he 
comes  in  the  flesh,  invested  with  the  reality  of  that 
which  the  cherubim  prefigures,  points  in  all  the  lessons 
and  parables  which  he  teaches,  in  the  sacrament  which 
he  instituted,  and  in  his  bloody  death  and  glorious 
resurrection.  To  this  second  Eden  he  points  the  soul 
of  man,  and  he  seals  his  title  to  it. 

The  redemption-work  extends  the  significance  of 
the  symbol.  It  passes  from  a  general  to  a  specific 
sense.  In  the  Revelation  of  Jesus  Christ  made  to  his 
servant  John  after  his  ascension,  the  Living-creatures 
appear  in  the  foreground  of  the  first  vision  no  longer 
as  emblems  of  spiritual  life  in  the  general,  but  of  the 
saints  invested  with  spiritual  life,  for  the  Redeemer 
has  come,  washed  his  peoj)le  from  their  sins,  and  en- 
dued them  with  spiritual  life.  That  emblem  of 
spiritual  life  which  had  been  placed  to  guard  the  gates 
of  Paradise,  which  illustrated  the  tabernacle  and  the 
temple  service,  which  bore  the  beaming  throne  of  the 
Almighty  when  he  appeared  in  vision  to  the  prophets, 
and  which  bears  it  still  as  he  appears  to  the  eye  of 
John,  becomes  the  emblem  of  the  redeemed  saints 
clothed  and  invested  with  the  life  which  it  prefig- 
ures. They  are  the  US  whom  Cln-ist  washed  from 
sin,  cli.  V.  9.  What  an  attestation  is  this  to  the  glory 
of  the  redemption-work  !  The  emblem  of  that  spirit- 
ual vitality  which  is  associated  with  God  himself  be- 
comes the  symbol  of  His  redeemed  saints. 

But  they  represent  the  dominion  of  the  saints,  for 
they  are  four  in  number,  and  they  prefigure  in  the 


ELDEES   AND  THE   LIYING-CEEATURES.  209 

prophecy,  as  is  evident  from  tlieir  application  through- 
out the  book,  the  triumph  of  God's  kingdom  still  in 
the  future. 

In  this  specific  sense  they  herald  to  Jolm  the 
mighty  contest  the  church  militant  on  earth  has  still 
to  wage  when,  wdth  their  solemn  "  come  and  see," 
they  point  to  the  four  combatants  of  the  first  four 
seals,  of  which  combatants  the  church  is  the  victor. 
It  is  with  the  same  significancy  that  one  of  them  gives 
unto  the  seven  angels,  "  having  the  seven  plagues," 
the  vials  of  the  wrath  of  God  w^ho  liveth  forever, 
vials  of  judgment  discharged  on  the  enemies  of  the 
church,  which  deliver  her  from  thraldom  and  procure 
her  victory. 

But  the  symbol  undergoes  another  and  a  more 
momentous  change.  "When  the  heavenly  Canaan  is 
reached,  when  Paradise  is  restored,  and  man  is  re- 
deemed, this  symbol,  like  the  types  of  the  Mosaic 
system,  evanishes ;  for  w^iy  ?  the  substance,  the  re- 
ality, is  attained,  and  the  emblem  has  no  farther  sig- 
nificance. When  tlie  work  of  redemption  is  com- 
pleted, the  Living-creatures  which  guarded  Eden, 
which  overshadowed  the  Mosaic  ritual,  which  bore 
the  throne  of  God  to  man  in  his  intercourse  with  Him 
when  man  was  far  off,  and  which  predict,  in  the  first 
vision  of  the  Revelation,  his  near  approach  to  the 
divine  presence,  have  neither  office  nor  significance 
more.  They  can  no  longer  guard  the  gates  of  Para- 
dise, for  the  saints  are  w^ithin  the  walls  of  the  ISlew 
Jerusalem.  They  cannot  guard  the  tree  of  life  against 
man,  for  man  can  pluck  its  twelve  manner  of  fruits 


210  ELDEKS  AND   THE  LIVING-CEEATUKES. 

wliicli  are  given  for  "  the  healing  of  the  nations  ;"  they 
can  no  longer  bear  the  throne  of  God  to  men,  for  tliis 
throne  is  stationary  in  the  midst  of  them,  while  forth 
from  it  flows  the  pure  river  of  water  of  life,  clear  as 
crystal ;  it  is  impossible  they  can  prefigure  the  tri- 
umph of  the  saints,  for  it  is  a  reality  and  it  is  present. 
Accordingly,  in  the  pictures  of  the  new  heavens  and 
the  new  earth  and  of  the  great  city,  'New  Jerusalem, 
as  they  appear  in  chs.  xxi.  and  xxii.  of  the  Revelation, 
the  cherubim  have  no  place.  This  exclusion  from  the 
representation  is  in  perfect  accordance  with  the  sense 
of  the  symbol.  They  are  solely  emblems  and  office- 
bearers in  a  system  of  things  which  has  then  ter- 
minated. When  that  which  they  foreshadowed  is 
realized,  they  naturally  become  extinct.  The  cheru- 
bim, which  guarded  Eden  against  fallen  man,  but 
which  still  were  agents  in  efi'ecting  its  restitution 
to  him  through  a  Redeemer,  when  the  Redeemer's 
work  is  done,  these  sublime  symbols  lift  their  mighty 
and  rustling  wings  and  flee  away  into  nonentity. 
They  vanish  like  the  types  and  symbols  of  the  Mosaic 
ritual,  but  they  preserve  their  existence  longer,  inas- 
much as  they  comprehend  both  dispensations.  Their 
wings  stretch  from  Eden  lost  to  Eden  regained. 

Such  is  the  symbolic  end  which  the  living-crea- 
tures serve.  They  connect  the  first  dawn  of  the 
redemption-work  with  its  close,  and  they  thus 
beautifully  evidence  that  unity  of  design  which 
marks  the  whole  of  God's  revelation  to  man.  In  the 
Revelation  naturally  they  concern  themselves  with 
the    closing    scenes  of  this  great  redemption-work. 


ELDEKS   AND   THE  LIVING-CEEATTJEES.  211 

Tliey  prefigure,  in  the  opening  vision,  its  snccessful 
issue;  they  call  the  prophet's  attention  in  the  first 
four  seals  to  the  conflict,  which  is  to  end  in  victory, 
and  one  of  them  gives  unto  the  seven  angels  the  vials 
which  are  to  secure  it. 

The  Four  and  Twenty  Elders  form  the  second  mem- 
ber of  the  compound  symbol,  which  we  are  now  con- 
templating and  discussing.  This  compound  symbol, 
as  ch.  V.  9  shows,  prefigures  the  kingdom  of  God  tri- 
umphant. The  two  members  of  the  symbol,  how- 
ever, have  evidently  a  distinctive  sense.  A  consid- 
eration of  the  following  distinction  which  prevails 
throughout  the  book,  will  enable  us  not  only  to  ascer- 
tain the  true  symbolic  meaning  of  the  Elders,  but  also 
to  afiix  the  distinctive  sense  to  each  member  of  the 
compound  symbol. 

It  can  hardly  be  doubted,  that  the  same  distinc- 
tion is  here  expressed,  which  maintains  throughout 
the  book  of  dominion,  into  temporal  and  ecclesiastic. 
This  distinction  is  vei'y  plainly  developed  when  the 
saints  are  said  to  be  made  Icings  and  ])riest8  unto 
God,  chs.  i.  6;  V.  10.  It  pervades  the  representa- 
tions, as  well  of  the  conquering  powder,  as  of  the  con- 
quered dominions.  The  former  appears  now  as  an 
armed  horseman,  ch.  vi.  2,  the  symbol  of  a  temporal 
power,  and  now  of  a  feeble  but  pure  woman,  ch  xii., 
the  bride,  the  Lamb's  wdfe,  ch.  xxi.  9,  and  the  glorious 
city,  Kew  Jerusalem,  the  two  last  of  which  are  sym- 
bols of  a  pure  spiritual  dominion.  It  pervades  also 
the  representations  of  the  conquered  dominions,  one 
of  which  always  appears  under  symbols  which  stand 


212  ELDEES   AND   THE   LIVING-CKEATUKES. 

for  an  ecclesiastical  power,  which  are,  the  False 
Prophet,  the  imj^ure  Whore,  and  the  doomed  city, 
Babylon.  The  two  others  are  represented  by  sym- 
bols expressive  of  temporal  powers.  There  is  thus 
running  through  the  book  a  distinction  of  dominion 
into  the  temporal  and  the  spiritual.  It  is  evident, 
then,  that  as  there  is  a  distinction  made  of  the  do- 
minion of  the  saints  by  the  compound  symbol,  it  must, 
on  the  ground  of  unity  of  design,  be  that  which  pre- 
vails in  the  book.  The  character  of  the  symbols  also 
responds  to  the  above  distinction  of  dominion.  The 
four  living-creatures  naturally  represent  the  kingdom 
of  God  temporally  ;  the  four  and  twenty  elders  eccle- 
siastically. The  one  represents  the  saints,  then,  as 
Mugs  ;  the  other,  as  priests  unto  God.  This  distinc- 
tion, however,  does  not  appear  in  the  New  Jerusa- 
lem, in  which  there  are  neither  Cherubim  nor  Elders, 
nor  any  other  symbols  which  are  capable  of  repre- 
senting it.  But  it  is  a  distinction  here  expressed, 
although  it  is  evidently  parf  of  the  old  economy 
which  passes  away.  Indeed,  the  statement  that  the 
saints  are  to  be  made  kings  and  priests  unto  God, 
expresses  a  union  of  the  civil  and  ecclesiastical  pow- 
ers in  their  persons,  for  the  meaning  plainly  is,  that 
each  saint,  in  his  individual  capacity,  is  to  be  made  a 
king  and  priest  unto  God,  which  is  irreconcilable 
wath  any  independent  existence  of  the  one  power 
apart  from  the  other.  The  distinction  drawn  of  the 
temporal  and  spiritual  dominion  of  the  saints,  must 
be  held  to  be  one  made  principally,  if  not  entirely, 
for  the  purpose  of  conveying  a  perfect  representation 


ELDERS    AND   THE   LIVING-CREATUEES.  213 

of  dominion,  for  wliicli  reason  the  two  known,  and  in 
Scrij^tiire  frequently  recognized  forms  of  it,  are  asso- 
ciated together  in  one  symbol. 

The  compound  symbol,  viewed  in  this  light,  is  a 
beautiful  one.  Four  living-creatures,  emblems  of  tlie 
temporal  dominion  of  the  saints,  bear  up  the  throne 
of  God  ;  four  and  twenty  elders,  emblems  of  their  ec- 
clesiastical dominion,  are  seated  round  about  it  as 
counsellors,  having  on  their  heads  crowns  of  gold. 
The  living-creatures  develop,  in  consistency  with  this 
their  distinctive  character,  the  portraitures  of  the  four 
great  dominions  of  the  prophecy,  and  give  unto  the 
seven  angels  the  vials  of  the  last  plagues  of  judgment. 
They  are  thus,  in  this  last  act,  instrumental  in  pro- 
curing the  temporal  victory  of  the  kingdom  of  God 
over  temporal  enemies.  The  vials  destroy  the  whole 
temporal  power  of  the  enemy.  The  elders,  true  to 
the  priestly  office,  explain  to  John  the  mysteries  of 
the  visions,  and  teach  him  what  it  is  necessary  for 
him  to  know.  At  the  conclusion  of  the  triumphant 
song  raised  by  all  creation,  the  living-creatures  say, 
with  simple  solemnity.  Amen  :  the  elders,  represent- 
atives of  the  sacerdotal  power,  fall  down  and  w^or- 
ship  him  that  liveth  forever  and  ever.  The  perfect 
homogeneity  of  the  symbol  in  this  distinctive  sense  of 
the  two  members  of  it,  is  thus  preserved  throughout. 

This  compound  symbol  is,  in  the  whole  form  of  it, 
a  magniiicent  one.  It  forms  a  perfect  representation 
of  dominion,  and  of  the  dominion  of  the  saints  which 
bodies  itself  forth  in  the  highest  forms  of  conceivable 
dominion,  kingship,  and  priestship  with  God.     The 


214  ELDERS   AND   THE   LIVING-CEEATUEES. 

living  creatures,  emblems  of  life,  associated  tliroiigli- 
oiit  Scripture  with  tlie  throne  of  God,  symbolize  it  in 
the  one  aspect ;  the  four  and  twenty  elders  connect- 
ing and  reaching  back  to  the  splendid  Mosaic  ritual, 
or,  according  as  the  original  of  the  symbol  may  be 
held,  comprehending  the  Mosaic  and  Christian  econ- 
omies together,  illustrate  it  under  the  other  ;  the  joint 
combination  of  the  rays  of  light  that  issue  from  the 
glowing  cherubim,  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  white- 
robed,  gold-crowned  elders,  on  the  other,  give  a 
splendor  of  imagery  which  is  at  once  dazzling  and 
sublime. 

But  in  the  blaze  of  light  there  is  a  mystic  diamond 
that  sparkles.  What  is  this  ?  It  is  the  combination  of 
the  symbolic  numbers  four  and  seven.  Four  is  the 
number  of  dominion,  and  seven  is  the  number  of  per- 
fection, the  multiplication  of  these  numbers  together 
forms  TWENTY-EIGHT,  the  combined  number  of  the  liv- 
ing-creatures and  the  elders.  This  is  a  jewel  of  pow- 
erful symbolic  lustre.  It  radiates  intensely.  The  same 
idea  is  expressed  in  the  numbers  which  is  contained 
in  the  symbols :  a  perfect  representation  of  dominion 
is  made,  or  rather,  the  rej^resentatiOn  of  a  perfect  do- 
minion. The  symbolic  sense  of  the  numbers  is,  at 
the  same  time,  in  eminent  harmony  with  the  distinc- 
tive sense  of  each  of  the  symbols.  Four  is  the  num- 
ber of  dominion,  and  it  is  assigned  to  the  living- crea- 
tures, which  symbolize  the  temporal  dominion  of  the 
saints ;  four  and  twenty  bears  an  ecclesiastical  asso- 
ciation, and  it  is  appropriated  to  the  elders.  The 
combination  of  both  numbers   describes  a  pekfect 


OFFICE   OF   THE   LIYING-CKEATUKES.  215 

do:minion  with   the  strongest  sj^mbolic   emphasis,  as 
temporal  and  sjnritual^  fourfold  and  sevenfold. 

The  symbol  thus  contains  a  whole  volume  of  allu- 
sion, and  of  this  volume  the  first  page  is  m  Genesis. 
and  the  last  and  the  most  profusely  lettered  and 
adorned  in  tlie  Revelation.  Proof  of  that  unity  of 
design  which  displays  itself  in  the  Bible  of  the  Great 
Eevealer ! 

Office  of  the  Living-creatuees  as  Heralds  of  the 
Subject. 

The  words  uttered  by  the  four  living-creatures, 
"  Come  and  see,"  will  be  found  to  afford  an  impor- 
tant clue  to  the  structure  of  the  prophecy. 

What  is  the  reason  that  tlie  four  beasts,  or  living- 
creatures,  say  to  John,  in  reference  to  the  pictures  of 
the  first  four  seals,  "  Come  and  see"  ?  This  is  an  in- 
vitation which  is  addressed  to  him  solely  in  reference 
to  these  pictures.  Why  is  the  invitation  made  to 
him  'to  "  come  and  see "  these  j)ictures,  and  not 
others  ? 

This  question  is  one  which  has  been  passed  over  in 
silence  by  the  greater  number  of  commentators  on  the 
book,  as  if  it  were  a  question  not  to  be  asked ;  and 
whenever  an  answer  has  been  attempted  to  it,  such  a 
one  has  invariably  been  rendered  as  to  refute  itself, 
either  by  its  being  really  no  answer,  or  being  an  ab- 
surd one.  Yet  a  sensible  and  solid  answer  must  be 
given  to  it.  It  cannot  be  denied  that  it  is  an  impor- 
tant question  in  the  consideration   of  this   allegory. 


216  OFFICE   OF  THE   LIVING-CEEATUEES. 

The  fact,  that  the  four  living-creatures  call  the  proph- 
et's attention  to  four  pictures,  cannot  be  held  other- 
wise than  a  feature  of  no  small  significancy.  Is^ay,  it 
may  reasonably  be  presumed  to  be,  tliat  very  feature 
in  the  book  which  we  ma}^  with  justice  conceive  is, 
more  than  any  other,  designed  to  develop  the  proph- 
et's plan  and  the  structure  of  his  piece.  What  is  the 
main  element  in  the  structure  of  the  prophecy  ?  It  is, 
undoubtedly,  the  delivery  of  it  in  a  seven-sealed  book. 
J^ow  four  living-creatures  call  the  prophet's  attention 
to  four  pictures  in  this  book.  Can  this  be  held  to  be 
a  feature  void  of  meaning  ?  The  natural  as  well  as 
legitimate  conclusion  would  be,  that  it  has  an  all-im- 
portant significancy. 

The  only  conceivable  reason  that  commentators 
have  neglected  this  important  feature  in  the  structure 
of  the  piece,  and  have  refused  to  avail  themselves  of 
the  aid  which  it  lends  in  the  interpretation,  is,  that 
they  have  been  incapable  of  accounting  for  it,  that  is, 
of  giving  any  reason  for  its  being  there,  or  assigning 
any  meaning  to  it.  Judicious  commentators  have 
thought  it  better  neither  to  attempt  nor  pretend  to 
give  any  solution  of  what  w^as  to  them  inexplicable. 
They  have  accordingly  passed  it  o\er  sicco  ])ede. 
Other  commentators,  again,  with  a  more  daring  fancy 
and  less  judgment,  have  ventured  on  explanations 
which  are  either  frivolous  or  absurd.  The  answer  to 
the  above  question,  then,  will  solve  an  important, 
perhaps  the  most  important,  problem  in  the  book ; 
and  it  will  remove  what  has  hitherto  been  a  dark 
spot  in  the  interpretation.    The  prophecy  of  John  can 


OFFICE   OF   THE   LIVING-CREATURES.  217 

with  no  justice  be  said  to  be  explained,  so  long  as  the 
meaning  of  that  which  must  have  heen  designed  is  un- 
discovered. It  will,  however,  in  our  estimation,  do 
much  more  than  remove  darkness ;  it  will  kindle 
liglit.  It  will  unveil  a  secret  lamp  which  the  prophet 
has  set  in  this  place,  which  has  escaped  the  attention 
of  all  commentators,  but  which  is  nevertheless  there, 
as  we  apprehend,  trinnned  and  ready  for  burning. 
To  this  lamp  we  shall  now  endeavor  to  apply  the 
flame,  and  we  shall  scarcely  fail  to  see  that  its  beams 
throw  a  steady  light  over  the  whole  prophecy. 

There  are  two  methods  of  interpreting  allegorical 
composition,  the  one  of  which,  and  we  regret  to  say 
the  worst  of  which,  has  been  more  generally  followed 
than  the  other.  These  are  those  giant  means  of  pros- 
ecuting truth,  which  are  known  as  the  deductive  and 
the  inductive  methods  of  investigation. 

By  the  former,  premises  are  laid  down  and  deduc- 
tions are  drawn  from  these.  It  is  the  worst  of  all 
means  for  ascertaining  the  true  sense  of  a  symbolical 
composition,  since  in  the  hands  of  a  skilful  or  in- 
genious reasoner,  almost  any  interpretation,  however 
unfounded,  may  be  made  to  wear  the  aspect  of  veri- 
similitude. It  has  been  applied,  to  a  large  extent,  to 
the  book  of  Revelation,  and  it  has  conduced,  along 
with  the  misapplication  of  the  inductive  process 
already  commented  on,  to  such  a  multiplicity  of  senses, 
as  to  aiford  very  little  prospect  of  arriving  through  it 
at  the  truth.  It  has  accordingly  been  nearl}^  as  fruit- 
less in  ascertainino^  the  true  meaning:  of  the  Word 
of  God,  so  far  as  contained  in  this  prophecy,  as  till 
10 


218  OFFICE   OF  THE   LIVING-CEEATTJEES. 

Bacon  overthrew  it,  it  had  been  fruitless  in  expound- 
ing the  works  of  God. 

By  the  inductive  method  you  collect  facts  and 
implicitly  follow  their  teachings.  The  facts  to  be 
collected  in  the  interpretation  of  an  inspired  writing, 
2::^^  fixed  senses^  either  senses  affirmed  by  the  direct 
interpretation  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  or  those  which 
resolve  themselves  out  of  these.  But  these  facts, 
when  made  a  basis  of  interpretation,  are  to  be  drawn 
solely  from  symbolic  Scripture.  Here  is  the  grand 
error  which  has  hitherto  been  committed,  and  which 
has  been  followed  by  such  disastrous  results  in  the 
application  of  the  inductive  process  to  the  Revela 
tion.  Facts  have  been  drawn  from  figurative  Scrip- 
ture, and  interpretations  raised  upon  these,  which  is 
simply  the  explaining  of  one  language  through  the 
medium  of  another. 

Now  in  attempting  an  answer  to  the  question, 
"Why  do  the  living-creatures  say  to  John,  Come  and 
see  the  four  pictures  of  the  first  four  seals  ?  it  is  our 
intention  to  j)rosecute  the  inductive  method  of  in- 
vestigation, and  in  our  search  for  facts  to  confine  our- 
selves to  symbolic  Scripture.  This  is  the  principle 
which  has  guided  us  liitherto,  and  to  which  we  intend 
rigidly  to  adhere  in  our  farther  researches.  Our 
object,  then,  will  be  to  ascertain  if  there  be  any  fact 
or  facts  in  symbolic  Scripture  which  throw  light  on 
this  feature  of  the  prophecy ;  any  facts  which  dis- 
play an  analogy  exhibiting  an  identity  of  design,  and 
therefore  of  meaning,  and  which  will  thus  be  ex- 
ponents of  it. 


OFFICE  OF  THE  LIYING-CREATTIRES.  219 

Daniel  is  the  prophet  whom  John  the  most  closely 
of  all  follows  ;  and  in  the  works  of  this  prophet  we 
may  reasonably  expect  an   analogous  case,  and  an 
analogy  here  will  have  the  greatest  weight.     In  one 
of  his  predictions,  we  do  find  a  fact  which  precisely 
corresponds  with  that  whose  explanation  we  desire. 
Daniel  says,  ch.  vii.  2,   3,   "  I  saw  in  my  vision  by 
night,  and  behold  the  four  winds  of  the  heaven  stood 
upon  the  great  sea.     And  four  great  beasts  came  up 
from  the  sea  diverse  one  from  another."     Here  there 
is  plainly  a  preliminary  performed  by  four  agents  to 
the  sight  on  the  part  of  the  prophet,  of  four  symbolic 
objects.     This  is  the  grand  feature  which  marks  the 
invocation  of  the  four  living-creatures  to  John.     In 
Daniel  four  winds  contend,  and  as  a  result  of  the  con- 
tention, the  prophet  sees  four  beasts.     In  the  Reve 
lation  four  living-creatures  say,  "  Come  and  see,"  and 
the   prophet   sees  four  horsemen.     The  preliminary 
performed   in   both    cases,   is   an    exordium    to   the 
prophecy,  and  an  introduction  to  four  subjects.    Thus 
far  the  analogy  holds  good ;  but  when  we  pursue  it 
farther,  we  shall  find  that  it  is  perfect.     The  principle 
then  developed  in  the  opening  of  the  prophecy  by 
either  prophet,  is  plainly  the  same — four  agents  in 
both  cases  open  it.     It  is  unessential,  that  in  Daniel 
the  winds  contend,  and  that  in  John  the  living-crea- 
tures say,  Come  and  see  ;  these  are  difi'erences  which 
result  from  the  difi'erent  character  of  the  whole  repre- 
sentation, and  cannot  be  held  to  have  any  efiect  in 
disturbing  the  particular  analogy.     The  prophecy  of   • 
Daniel  is  represented  as  delivered  to  him  through  a 


220  OFFICE   OF   THE   LIVrN"G-CEEATUEES. 

vision  of  objects  immediately  exposed  to  his  sight; 
the  prophecy  of  John,  in  a  vision  0/  pictures  seen  on 
a  look,  at  least  this  is  the  representation  made,  ah 
though  many  of  the  pictures  assume  the  aspect  of 
sensible  objects.  This  essential  difference  in  the 
character  of  the  whole  representation,  necessitates  a 
corresponding  difference  in  that  of  the  prelusive  step. 

Zechariah  vi.,  who  is  also  a  symbolic  prophet,  and 
who  is  also  a  model  for  John,  exhibits  an  introduc- 
tion which  likewise  bears  a  strict  analogy  to  the  de- 
velopment made  by  the  four  living-creatures  in  the 
Kevelation,  making  the  necessary  allowance  for  the 
different  character  of  the  whole  representation. 

In  applying  this  analogy  to  the  Revelation,  let  us 
consider  what  is  the  real  purpose  and  design,  and 
therefore  what  is  the  real  meaning  of  this  special  intro- 
duction of  the  subject,  which  is  exemplified  by  Daniel 
and  Zechariah,  which  is  followed  by  John,  and  which 
must  have  the  same  signification  and  bearing  in  the 
three  prophets. 

The  design  and  meaning  may  be  stated  in  the  fol- 
lowing terms : 

1st.  To  introduce  the  principal  symbolic  objects 
which  convey  the  predictions. 

2d.  To  trace  these  symbols  from  their  origin. 

3d.  To  characterize  their  political  and  moral 
qualities. 

4:th.  To  indicate  the  quaternal  structure  of  the 
prophecy. 

6th.  To  impress  it  with  unity. 

Let  us  consider  these  in  their  order. 


OFFICE  OF  THE   LIVING-CREATURES.  221 

The  first  is  a  strictly  festlietical  purpose,  and  is 
destitute  of  any  farther  meaning,  except  that  of  im- 
pressing the  prophecy  with  a  perfect  unity  by  the 
prefixment  of  a  formal  introduction  to  it.  This  feat- 
ure of  an  introduction  belongs  only  to  the  higher 
forms  of  the  symbolic  art.  It  is  scarcely  developed 
out  of  the  Apocal3^pse.  It  is  perceptible  perhaps  no- 
where else  in  the  Old  Testament,  excepting  in  this 
prophecy  of  Daniel  and  in  another  of  Zechariah,  to 
which  we  shall  shortly  allude.  In  these  cases  it  is 
not  manifested  more  than  in  the  mere  germ.  But  in 
the  Revelation,  which  manifests  artistic  development 
of  a  high  character,  and  displays  the  symbolic  art  in 
its  highest  perfection,  it  is  carried  out  to  a  full  extent, 
and  is  not  only  largely  but  frequently  exliibited.  It 
contains  a  magnificent  introductory  vision,  chs.  iv.  and 
v.,  to  the  whole  prophecy.  There  is  the  introduction 
to  the  four  symbolic  pictures  at  present  under  consid- 
eration. There  is  an  introduction  prefixed  to  the 
seven  trumpets,  ch.  viii.  2-6,  and  another  to  the  seven 
vials,  ch.  XV.  These  introductions  all  contain  mean- 
ing in  the  second  as  well  as  in  the  first  sense,  although 
this  must  be  regarded  as  not  strictly  predictive  ;  but 
we  are  viewing  them  at  present  under  their  cesthetical 
aspect.  In  this  respect  they  serve  merely  as  what 
may  be  called  machinery  for  bringing  the  symbolic 
imagery  before  the  eye,  and  are  designed  doubtless  to 
notify  to  the  mind  the  unity,  and,  at  the  same  time, 
the  importance  of  the  subject.  It  does  not  appear  on 
the  stage  of  repi-esentation  unheralded.  It  is  there- 
fore not  insignificant,  and  it  must  be  held  to  be  one 


222  OFFICE   OF   THE   LIVING-CEEATUEES. 

till  a  fresli  herald  appears.     This  design  may  be  re- 
garded as  chiefly  sesthetic. 

The  second  purpose  of  the  introduction  is  to  trace 
the  subjects  of  j^rediction  from  their  origin.  It  is  a 
characteristic  of  symbolic  composition  to  give  a  full 
representation  of  whatever  subject  it  takes  up;  its 
origin  is  accordingly  traced  ccb  ovo.  It  is  in  consist- 
ency with  unity  of  design,  that  as  the  subject  is  con- 
ducted to  its  end  it  should  be  traced  from  its  begin- 
ning. In  all  the  introductions  of  John  we  observe 
this  iprinciple  of  full  representation  at  work.  The 
Seven-Sealed  Book  which  contains  his  prophecy  is 
traced  to  its  original  in  "  the  right  hand  of  Him  that 
sat  on  the  throne,"  ch.  v.  1.  The  judgments  repre- 
sented by  the  seven  trumpets  have  their  origin  as- 
signed to  them  in  the  temple  of  God,  in  which  the 
seven  angels  s^und  the  trumpets,  for  the  reason  doubt- 
less that  the  sins  against  His  truth  cause  and  originate 
His  judgments.  The  same  original  is  assigned  in  a 
manner  which  may  be  regarded  as  emphasized  to  the 
seven  vials,  for  here  not  only  the  angels  proceed  from 
the  temj)le,  ch.  xv.  6,  but  one  of  the  four  living- 
creatures,  a  symbol,  it  has  been  shown,  of  the  tem- 
poral dominion  of  the  saints,  gives  unto  the  seven 
angels  seven  golden  vials  full  of  the  wrath  of  God, 
"  who  liveth  forever  and  ever,"  v.  7.  That  the  church 
is  the  avenger,  and  that  the  judgments  i3redicted  have 
their  origin  in  the  neglect  of,  or  hostility  to,  the  truth, 
is  twice  proclaimed,  and  the  origin  of  the  judgments 
is  vividly  and  doubly  stated.  In  the  analogous  case 
already  adduced  from  Daniel,  the  same  design  of  stat- 


OFFICE   OF   THE   LIVING'CREATUKES.  223 

ing  the  origin  of  the  subject  is  observable.  The  four 
winds  contending  on  the  sea  are  represented  as  intro- 
ducing and  originating  the  subject  of  prediction. 

It  is  with  the  agency  employed  for  this  purpose, 
"  the  four  winds,"  rather  than  the  source,  "  the  sea," 
from  whence  the  symbols  arise,  that  we  have  now 
more  particularly  to  do,  although,  as  will  afterwards  be 
seen,  there  is  an  analogy  established  between  this  ele- 
ment also  and  the  living-creatures.  The  winds  are 
the  originating  agency,  and  they  form  a  source  of 
origin  to  the  dominions,  viewed  in  one  aspect,  while 
the  sea,  as  will  be  seen,  does  it  in  another.  E'ow  the 
symbolic  meaning  of  wind  is  '^  dominion."  As  four 
winds  are  all  the  winds  of  heaven  according  to  He- 
brew reckoning,  as  the  number  "  four  "  bears  the  sym- 
bolic sense  of  dominion,  and  as  the  winds  are  unde- 
scribed  being  simply  "  the  four  winds,"  they  cannot  be 
conceived  to  stand  for  any  other  idea  except  that  of 
dominion  in  the  general.  The  image  presented  is 
four  winds  which,  rushing  from  the  four  points  of  the 
compass,  meeting  in  collision  on  the  sea,  and  consti- 
tuting, as  it  is  natural  to  suppose,  a  violent  whirlwind — 
lash  the  ocean  into  foam,  and  bring  up  from  its  depths 
four  monsters,  which  then  become  visible.  The  sense, 
in  a  literal  acceptation,  is  a  picturesque  and  graphic 
one  ;  but  a  symbolic  meaning  lies  under  it,  which  is 
sufficiently  obvious.  The  representation  here  made 
is,  that  dominion,  in  the  general  or  abstract,  gives 
birth  to  or  evolves  from  itself  dominions  in  the  par- 
ticular or  concrete.  Four  winds  sweeping  from  tho 
four  ends  of  the  firmament,  and  joining  together  in 


224:  OFFICE   OF  THE  LIVING-CEEATURES. 

one  whirlwind,  in  one,  so  to  speak,  wrestling  colunui, 
present  a  striking  image  of  dominion  in  the  abstract, 
travailing  in  birth,  and  giving  origin  to  four  great 
concrete  empires.  If  it  were  the  purpose  of  the 
Spirit  of  God  to  assign  an  origin  to  the  subjects  sym- 
bolically, no  one  more  fitting  can  be  imagined.  From 
whence  can  dominions  be  properly  said  to  proceed  or 
to  arise  except  out  of  dominion  ?  It  is  certainly  the 
principle  of  dominion,  or,  in  other  words,  it  is  domin- 
ion in  the  abstract,  which  has  generated,  under  the 
divine  agency,  all  the  dominions  which  ever  existed. 
This  sense  is  entirely  in  harmony  with  the  signification 
of  the  symbol,  and  appears  to  be  highly  appropriate. 
It  is,  moreover,  not  easy  to  see  what  other  symbolic 
sense  can  be  educed  at  all,  if  this  be  resigned. 

But  whether  this  be  held  to  be  the  real  sense  im- 
plied in  the  representation  or  not,  is  a  matter  of  no 
moment  to  the  object  of  the  present  inquiry — the 
bearing  of  this  introduction  on  the  structure  of  the 
Hevelation.  It  is  sufficient  for  this  purpose  to  ob- 
serve that  Daniel  originates  the  symbols  of  his 
prophecy,  afterwards  interpreted  to  be  kingdoms  or 
dominions,  from  one  general  symbol  of  dominion  in 
the  fourfold,  or  in  other  words,  the  perfect  form. 
John  attributes  to  the  symbols  of  the  first  four  seals  a 
similar  origin,  for  they  are  represented  as  introduced 
and  originated  likewise  by  a  fourfold  symbol  of  do- 
minion, which  is  the  four  living-creatures.  It  is  true 
this  latter  symbol  has  been  interpreted  to  stand 
specially  for  the  temporal  dominion  of  the  kingdom 
of  God,  but  this  is  no  reason  why,  in  discharging  the 


OFFICE   OF  THE   LIYESTG-CREATUEES.  225 

office  of  an  introduction,  it  should  not  unde^-go  a 
modification  of  its  meaning,  or  rather  have  a  further 
sense  superadded  to  it  wliich  may  very  properly-  be 
held  to  be,  as  with  the  four  winds,  dominion  in  the 
abstract  or  general. 

In  Zechariah  we  find  another  introduction  ex- 
actly parallel  to  the  above  of  Daniel.  We  find  an 
image  of  dominion  in  the  full  or  perfect  form  at  the 
opening  of  his  prophecy  of  the  four  chariots,  cli.  vi. 
This  symbol  accordingly  occupies  the  same  position 
as  the  four  winds  of  Daniel,  and  the  four  living- 
creatures  of  the  Revelation,  and  it  fulfils  precisely 
the  same  office,  namely,  that  of  originating  the  sym- 
bols.    Zechariah  says,  ch.  vi.  1 : 

"  And  I  turned  and  lifted  up  mine  eyes  and  look- 
ed, and  behold  there  came  four  chariots  out  from 
between  two  mountains  ;  and  the  mountains  were 
mountains  of  brass."  Thus  Zechariah  opens  his 
prophecy. 

J^ow  the  number  here  is  two  instead  of  four,  as 
above,  but  it  has  the  same  force  as  four,  as  will  be  seen 
when  we  regard  the  symbol  closely  for  a  moment. 
A  mountain  is  as  "  a  wind,"  a  figure  of  dominion  ; 
the  latter  is  the  moving  force  of  the  heavens,  the 
former  is  the  most  powerful  object  on  the  surface  of 
the  earth.  They  are  both  employed  in  the  sense  of 
dominion  throughout  Scripture,  and  this  symbolic 
sense  of  both  is  universally  admitted.  A  mountain 
is  a  natural  and  appropriate  symbol  of  dominion, 
rising  above,  and  if  there  be  a  stronghold  upon  it,  ex- 
ercising dominion  over  the  surrounding  plains.  It 
10* 


OFFICE   OF  THE  LIVINa-CKEATURES. 

has  naturally,  like  a  pyramid,  four  sides,  and  looks 
to  the  four  quarters  of  the  heavens,  and  it  is  thus  to 
,  a  certain  extent  associated  with  four,  the  number  of 
dominion.  But  a  single  mountain,  as  well  as  a  single 
wind,  is  only  competent  to  represent  a  single  domin- 
ion, and  it  is  employed  to  do  this  as  in  the  instances, 
Jer.  li.  25  ;  Zech.  iv.  7,  &c.  But  it  is  not  one  moun- 
tain which  is  here  employed,  but  two.  The  question 
is,  do  two  mountains  constitute  the  proper  form  of  this 
symbol  for  dominion  in  the  general.  A  legitimate  in- 
ference to  this  effect  may  be  drawn  from  the  consider- 
ation that  two  mountains  undescribed,  and  therefore 
not  contradistinguished  from  each  other,  cannot  repre- 
sent dominions  in  the  particular  or  concrete  at  all. 
The  conclusion  is,  that  not  standing  for  particular  do- 
minions, they  can  only  represent  the  idea  of  abstract 
dominion.  But  it  may  be  said  four  is  the  number 
for  the  full  form  of  dominion,  and  the  number  thus 
employed  in  the  above  example  of  Daniel.  It  cer- 
tainly is,  but  the  number  four  is  evidently  unsuited, 
as  will  appear,  for  the  particular  image  here  em- 
ployed by  the  prophet,  which  is  mountain.  Four 
mountains  compose  evidently  an  incongruous  and 
imperfect  figure — a  figure  besides  altogether  unsuited 
for  the  pictorial  design.  This  was  to  represent  four 
chariots  coming  out  into  view  from  a  recess  or  valley. 
Such  a  valley  two  mountains  naturallj^  form,  but  four 
cannot  be  held  to  do  this  in  any  shape.  The  number 
two  also  associated  with  mountain,  constitutes  in 
Scriptural  conception  a  perfect  image,  while  the 
number  four  in  connection  with  mountains  nowhere 


OFFICE  OF  THE  LiVlNG-CREATUEES.  227 

occurs.  Of  this  the  words  "  Tabor  and  Hermon  shall 
rejoice  in  thy  name,"  afford  a  striking  example,  where 
the  Psalmist  uses  two  mountains  to  convey  a  perfect 
image,  and  to  represent  the  whole  land.  Indeed  the 
association  of  the  number  "  two "  with  mountains 
pervades  Scripture,  as  might  be  shown  by  many  in- 
stances. Two  mountains,  moreover,  really  form  a 
^double  quaternary,  each  mountain  having  four  sides, 
and  looking  to  the  four  quarters  of  the  heavens,  so 
that  the  number  four  may  still  be  held  to  prevail  in 
the  duplicate  form.  The  two  mountains  are  then 
precisely  equivalent  to  the  four  winds. 

The  two  mountains,  then,  from  between  which  the 
four  chariots  issue,  evidently  bear  the  same  sense  as 
the  four  winds  of  Daniel  and  the  four  living-creatures 
of  the  Kevelation  in  their  capacity  as  introducing 
symbols.  They  perform  the  same  offices,  and  they 
subserve  tlie  same  designs  both  pictorially  and  sym- 
bolically. 

It  is  to  be  observed,  that  neither  the  mountains 
of  Zechariah  nor  the  winds  of  Daniel  form  any  part 
of  the  prophecy,  strictly  so  called,  as  appears  from 
the  interpretations  in  which  they  are  not  alluded  to. 
They  are  evidently  introducing  and  originating  sym- 
bols, serving  first  the  object  purely  pictorial  of  "prQ- 
senting  the  prophetic  symbols  to  the  eye,  and  secondly, 
and  doubtless  mainly,  serving  the  symbolic  purpose 
of  assigning  an  origin  to  the  subjects  of  prediction. 
As  the  subjects  in  Daniel  and  Zechariah  are  do- 
minions, for  so  the  interpretations  state,  this  origin 
can  only  be  held  to  be  dominion  in  the  general  or 


ZZ5  OFFICE   OF  THE   LIVING-CBEA.TUEES. 

abstract  idea  of  it,  for  it  is  not  easy  to  form  the  con- 
ception of  the  origination  of  kingdoms  or  empires 
from  any  other  source.  ISTor  can  the  symbol  employ- 
ed, whether  it  be  "  four  winds  "  or  "  two  mountains," 
have  any  other  signification  as  an  introducing  one, 
legitimately  attached  to  it. 

That  the  same  idea  is  expressed  by  the  analogous 
introduction  made  by  the  four  living-creatures  in  the 
[Revelation  cannot  be  doubted.  The  four  living-crea- 
tures as  introducers  of  four  horsemen,  which  latter 
unquestionably  represent  dominions,  as  is  clear  upon 
other  grounds,  form  an  equally  appropriate  image 
with  four  winds  and  two  mountains  of  dominion  in 
the  abstract,  full,  or  perfect  form  ;  that  is,  of  the  idea 
of  dominion.  It  is  clear  from  the  strictly  synony- 
mous significations  which  these  three  introducing 
symbols  and  the  analogies  developed  in  the  applica- 
tions of  them,  that  they  all  stand  for  the  same  idea, 
which  would  appear  to  be  that  stated.  This  much  is 
certain,  that  they  all  develop  a  strict  analogy  to- 
gether ;  that  they  are  all,  if  the  expression  may  be 
allowed,  \\\q  jparental  symbols  of  the  jpredictive  sym- 
bol. From  the  four  winds  of  Daniel  and  two  moun- 
tains of  Zechariah,  as  from  a  nuclens  or  germ,  are 
evolved  the  four  dominions  which  these  prophets 
predict  concerning.  Is  the  analogy  to  be  violated, 
and  this  beautiful  unity  of  conception  herein  devel- 
oped to  be  refused  to  the  structure  of  the  Revelation  ? 

The  third  design  manifested,  is  the  characterizing 
the  subjects  as  to  their  political  and  moral  qualities. 

The  attributed  origin  of  the  symbols  which  appear 


OFFICE   OF  THE   LIVING-CREATURES.  229 

in  the  introductions  to  a  symbol  of  dominion  in  the 
full  form,  whether  this  is  to  be  held  to  stand  for  tlie 
abstract  idea  of  dominion  or  not,  is  at  least  a  suffi- 
ciently clear  indication  that  the  subjects  thus  intro- 
duced are  political  dominions.  This  is  a  conclusion 
which  might  be  drawn  with  perfect  legitimacy  in  ref- 
erence to  the  prophecies  in  question,  of  Daniel  and 
Zechariah  ;  but  the  process  does  not  require  to  be  per- 
formed in  regard  to  these,  because  in  the  interpreta 
tions  rendered,  the  subjects  are  expressly  stated  to  be 
kingdoms,  Dan.  vii.  23  ;  Zech.  vi.  5.  But  it  is  a 
valid  and  also  a  valuable  conclusion  for  the  subjects 
of  the  first  four  seals  of  the  Revelation  which  are  not 
interpreted,  and  it  totally  overthrows  all  those  inter- 
pretations wliich  have  been  usually  put  upon  these 
seals,  and  which  apply  the^n  now  to  eras  of  political 
dominions,  and  now  to  states  of  the  church.  Ac- 
cording to  the  analogy  established,  they  can  only 
represent  four  distinct  political  dominions  in  their 
full  individuality,  and  in  the  whole  extent  of  their 
duration.  Why  ?  because  the  symbols  similarly  in- 
troduced of  Daniel  and  Zechariah  do  this. 

But  their  moral  quality  is  likewise  developed  in 
this  introduction.  It  is  expressed  by  the  attachment 
of  a  moral  quality  to  the  source  from  whence  they 
are  represented  as  springing.  In  Daniel  this  is  done 
through  the  medium  of  an  associated  symbol ;  in 
Zechariah  it  is  done  in  a  more  condensed  manner  by 
the  same  pymbol,  which  represents  the  full  form  of 
dominion.  And  this  is  the  mode  of  characterization 
which,  as  it  will  be  seen,  is  followed  in  the  Revela- 


230  OFFICE  OF  THE   LIVING-CREATUEES. 

tion.  With  the  above  object  in  view,  Daniel  charac- 
terizes his  four  dominions  as  bad,  by  representing 
them  as  rising  up  out  of  the  sea.  The  force  of  the 
symbol,  the  sea,  in  this  sense  will  be  apparent  when 
we  consider  it.  The  sea  was  to  the  ancient  Hebrews 
an  object  of  terror,  which  any  great  undefined  and 
unknown  object  naturally  is  to  the  popular  mind.  It 
wag  associated  in  their  ideas  with  terrible  things,  and 
with  monsters  that  inhabited  it.  Such  was  the  popu- 
lar notion  of  the  sea,  which  is  one  common  to  every 
landward  people.  It  is  hence  very  naturally  employed 
by  the  prophets  to  represent  the  original  of  bad  do- 
minions. It  is  here  used  by  Daniel  as  such,  for  the 
symbols  of  the  four  kingdoms  are  described  as  rising 
up  out  of  it ;  and  that  they  are  wicked  dominions, 
and  as  such  are  destined  to  final  destruction,  the  in- 
terpretation shows.  John  adopts  the  same  mode  of 
representation  in  more  than  one  instance.  That 
wicked  and  monstrous  dominion,  the  Seven-headed 
Ten-horned  Beast,  is  described  as  rising  up  out  of  the 
sea.  The  destroying  agents  of  the  fifth  trumpet  are 
said  to  issue  from  the  smoke  of  the  bottomless  pit, 
i.  e.,  to  arise  out  of  the  mist  of  the  sea,  for  the  Greek 
word  ^/3€a/},  here  employed,  certainly  imports  an  asso- 
ciation with  water,  and  in  all  probability  a  connection 
is  here  made  with  the  abyss  of  the  sea.  The  same 
idea  of  making  the  abyss  of  the  sea  the  figurative 
dwelling-place  of  noxious  and  monstrous  dominions 
of  any  kind,  when  these  are  either  in  a  state  of  non- 
existence or  inactivity  for  a  period,  is  to  be  found  in 
the  shutting  up  of  Satan  for  a  season  in  the  bottom- 


OFFICE   OF  THE  LIVING-CREATURES.  231 

less  pit  or  abyss.  The  idea  is,  that  Satan  is  chained 
in  the  abyss  for  a  time,  and  is  rendered  harmless. 
The  principle  of  representation  then  followed  by  both 
prophets  is  this :  When  wicked  dominions  are  in  a 
state  of  non-existence  or  inaction,  they  are  in  the 
depths  of  the  sea  or  the  abyss ;  when  they  come  into 
action  they  rise  np  ont  of  it.  It  is  in  accordance 
with  this  conception  that  the  fonr  beasts  of  Daniel, 
which  stand  for  wicked  dominions,  are  represented  as 
rising  np  out  of  the  sea.  We  are  authorized  to  con- 
clude that  they  are  characterized  by  this  representa- 
tion as  bad  ;  for  if  not,  what  is  the  sense  of  the  repre- 
sentation ?  The  four  winds  develop  them  from  a 
symbol  of  abstract  dominion  ;  acting  upon  the  sea, 
they  bring  up  the  symbols  of  these  dominions  from 
it,  and  these,  by  this  origination  from  a  bad  source, 
are  characterized  as  bad.  In  Zechariah  this  charac- 
terization of  the  moral  qualities  of  the  dominions  is 
done  in  a  more  condensed  manner ;  the  symbol  of 
dominion  in  the  full  form  from  whence  they  proceed 
is  made  to  do  it.  The  two  mountains  which  repre- 
sent dominion  in  the  general,  have  a  symbol  indicat- 
ing a  moral  quality  attached  to  them ;  they  are  said 
to  be  mountains  of  hrass.  This  is  in  Scriptural  asso- 
ciation an  inferior  or  bad  metal,  as  compared  with 
gold  and  silver,  and  its  s^^mbolic  sense  is  necessarily 
moral  inferiority.  In  the  proceeding  of  the  chariots 
from  between  two  mountains  of  brass,  a  bad  original  is 
assigned  to  them,  and  they  are  consequently  charac- 
terized as  bad.  It  is  a  legitimate  conclusion  that, 
the  chariots  which  proceed  from  between  two  moun- 


'j^OZ  OFFICE   OF   THE   LIVING-CREATUEES. 

tains  of  brass  were  brazen  ;  whether  this  be  the  case 
or  not,  their  original  is  bad,  it  being  a  valley  formed 
by  two  mountains  composed  of  a  bad  metal.  For  the 
association  of  this  metal  with  moral  corruption,  in 
Scripture,  Isa.  xlviii.  4 ;  Jer.  vi.  28 ;  Ezek.  xxii.  18, 
may  be  consulted. 

In  the  Revelation  this  determination  of  the  moral 
character  of  the  dominions  is  a  matter  of  much 
greater  difficulty,  and  of  more  nice  appreciation ; 
since,  while  in  Daniel  and  Zechariah  the  dominions 
are  all  bad,  here  one  of  them  we  certainly  know  is 
good,  and  three  are  bad.  The  difficulty,  however,  is 
overcome,  and  the  discrimination  is  made  by  an  in- 
genious adaptation  of  the  imagery  whicli  manifests  a 
marvellous  display  of  symbolic  contrivance  and  skill. 
The  four  living-creatures,  which,  as  a  whole,  stand 
for  dominion  in  the  general,  like  the  four  winds  and 
two  mountains,  have,  which  these  have  not,  their  in- 
dividual characteristics.  It  is  on  the  basis  of  these 
individual  characteristics  which  neither  the  w^inds  nor 
the  mountains  of  Zechariah  have,  that  the  discrimi- 
nation is  made.  The  first  living-creature,  we  are 
told,  was  like  a  lion,  and  the  second  like  a  calf,  and 
the  third  had  a  face  as  a  man,  and  the  fourth  was 
like  a  flying  eagle,  ch.  iv.  7.  The  discrimination  of 
the  moral  qualities  of  the  dominions  is  performed  by 
the  following  curious  piece  of  symbolic  mechanism, 
the  ingenuit}^  of  which  is  not  more  surpi-ising  than 
its  existence  is  real.  The  pointer  that  indicates  the 
moral  quality  of  the  dominion  is  moved,  as  it  will  be 
seen,  on  the  principle  of  harmony  on  the  one  hand, 


OFFICE   OF   THE   LIYING-CKEATrRES.  233 

and  antithesis  on  the  other,  between  the  emblematic 
sio'nitication  of  the  introclucino^  livino^  creature  and 
the  dominion  it  heralds.  An  emblematic  relationship 
prevails  on  the  principle  of  harmony  with  the  good 
dominion,  of  contrast  with  tlie  bad. 

It  is  to  be  borne  in  mind  that,  while  the  four  liv- 
ing-creatures, on  the  ground  of  tlie  analogy,  already 
pointed  out,  as  subsisting  between  them  in  their  char- 
acter of  introducing  symbols,  and  the  four  winds  and 
two  mountains,  represent,  in  their  capacity  of  heralds 
of  the  Urst  four  seals,  the  idea  of  dominion  in  the  gen- 
eral, they  stand  in  the  introductory  vision  (as  has  been 
shown,  and  as  appears  plainly  from  ch.  v.  8-10)  for 
the  temporal  branch  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  they 
prefigure  the  saints  as  kings  unto  God.  This  sense 
they  bear  throughout  the  book,  and  they  retain  it 
here  also.  The  twofold  sense  of  a  symbol  is  author- 
ized by  the  angel,  ch.  xvii.  9,  10  ;  and  although  the 
latter  sense  is  not  here  the  prominent  one,  it  still  ex- 
ists in  abeyance.  It  is  now  brought  forward  to  desig- 
nate the  moral  character  of  the  dominions.  In  their 
capacity  as  emblems  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  the 
living-creatures  point,  on  the  principle  of  harmony, 
to  the  good  dominion,  and  of  contrast  to  the  three  bad. 
Such  a  relationship  is  manifest ;  it  can  only  have  the 
sense  imputed  to  it.  If  any  one  says  this  is  a  merely 
ingenious  interpretation,  let  him  deny  the  foots  on 
which  it  is  founded  or  give  them  another  explanation. 
Thus,  the  living  creature,  like  a  lion,  the  king  of 
beasts,  associated  in  Scripture  with  Christ,  who  is 
named  the  Lion  of  the  tribe  of  Judali,  points,  on  the 


234:  OFFICE   OF   THE   LIVING-CEEATUEES. 

j)rinciple  of  harmony,  to  tlie  dominion  of  wliicli  Christ 
is  the  head,  and  to  the  dominion  which  is  to  conquer 
and  be  pre-eminent  over  all  others.  None  can  deny 
the  relationship  is  one  of  agreement.  Here,  however, 
the  harmony  stops.  The  relationship  in  the  three 
following  seals  is  that  of  direct  contrast  and  antithe- 
sis. The  living-creature,  like  an  ox,  the  symbol  of 
peaceful  toil  and  creative  industry,  is  the  herald  of 
the  bloody  and  warlike  dominion  of  the  second  seal ; 
it  can  only  be  associated  with  it  on  the  ground  of 
contrast.  The  living-creature  that  had  a  face  as  a 
man,  the  emblem  of  wisdom,  is  associated  on  the  like 
basis  with  the  dominions  whose  characteristic  is  spir- 
itual ignorance  and  famine.  The  Living-creature  that 
was  like  a  flying  eagle,  the  symbol  of  life,  is  placed 
in  the  same  antithesis,  in  its  emblematic  sense,  with 
the  dominion  of  the  fourth  seal,  whose  name  is 
Death. 

"We  see,  then,  that  the  emblem  of  the  kingdom  of 
God  stands  in  a  relation  of  harmony  with  the  symbol 
which  is  its  own  representative,  and  in  that  of  anti- 
thesis with  its  enemies.  This  adaptation  of  the 
imagery  only  confirms  the  conclusion  to  which  the 
whole  book  points,  to  wit,  that  the  kingdom  of  God  is 
opposed  by  tliree  enemies,  and  wages  a  contest  with 
three  combatants,  which,  on  other  grounds  besides 
the  above,  are  to  be  held  re]3resented  by  the  second, 
third,  and  fourth  Horsemen. 

We  see,  then,  in  the  first  four  seals,  the  subject  of 
the  whole  prophecy  developed  in  miniature  by  the 
agency  of  the  Four  Living-creatures.     Tlie  four  do- 


OFFICE   OF   THE   LIYING-CREATUEES.  235 

minions,  ^vliicli  constitute  the  whole  subject  of  it,  are 
ori^-inated  from  one  and  the  same  source,  which  is 
dominiou  in  the  general  symbolized  by  the  living- 
creatures  ;  a  perfect  unity  is  impressed  on  the  proph- 
ecy ;  the  relationship  of  the  dominions  to  each  other 
are  pointed  out  as  being  that  of  antagonism  of  the 
three  last  against  the  first,  a  relationship  which  de- 
velops a  plan  for  the  prophecy  which  is  borne  out 
by  all  its   subsequent  manifestations  ;    their   moral 
characters  and,  by  consequence,  their  future  destiny, 
may  be  predicated  from  the  terms  of  this  introduc- 
tion.    How  pregnant  is   this   symbolic  passage  with 
significance!      Can   any  language   of    words   rival 
this  eloquent  conciseness  of  symbolic  painting  ?  How 
exquisite,    at  the  same  time,  is   the   adjustment   of 
the    symbolic    machinery   to   fulfil  the    design  con- 
templated, and  how  magnificent  is  the  unity  of  design 
manifested  in  the  evolution    of  the  subject!     How 
profound  is  the  meaning  of  the  invitation,  "  come  and 
see,"   addressed   to   John  by   the   Living-creatures! 
Yerily,  they  are  w^eighty  words,  the  "  come  and  see," 
for  they  import  come  and  see  the  whole  subject  of  the 
prophecy. 

Is  this  profound  sense  to  be  thrown  away,  and 
some  one  that  is  empty  and  jejune,  or  no  sense  at  all, 
to  be  set  up  in  the  place  of  it  ?  This  would  be  con- 
trary to  every  sound  principle  of  hermeneutics.  Is  it 
to  be  held  without  sense  that  the  lion  is  associated 
with  the  dominion  whose  head  is  the  Lion  of  the  tribe 
of  Judah?  Is  it  without  meaning  that  the  man  is 
associated,  on  the  principle  of  contrast,  with  the  do- 


OFFICE   OF  THE  LIVING-CREATUEES. 

minion  whose  liead  is  the  Man  of  Sin,  who  has  eyes 
like  the  eyes  of  a  man,  Dan.  vii.,  and  who  has  the 
number  of  a  man.  Rev.  eh.  xiii.  ?  Surely  the  selec- 
tion of  the  Living-creature,  that  had  a  face  as  a  man, 
to  introduce,  on  the  principle  of  antagonism,  the  do- 
minion that,  in  Scripture  and  in  history,  is  pre-emi- 
nently the  dominion  of  the  man,  is  not  without  mean- 
ing. Why  does  the  lion  fall  to  the  first  seal  and  the 
man  to  the  third  seal  ?  Why  is  the  peaceful  ox  op- 
posed to  the  man  of  war,  and  the  pale  figure  of  Death 
contrasted  with  the  symbol  of  life  ?  Are  not  these 
coincidences,  and  more  that  might  be  noted,  coinci- 
dences of  such  a  nature  as  to  preclude  the  idea  of 
their  being  contingencies  ;  and  are  they  not  evidences 
at  once  of  the  unity  and  the  depth  of  Scriptural 
design  ? 

The  three  introductions  of  Daniel,  Zechariah,  and 
John,  are  plainly  all  cast  in  the  same  mould  ;  they 
develop  one  design.  Tlie  imagery  employed  is  in- 
deed dilferent,  and  it  requires  difi*erent  modelling  and 
adaptations.  Thus  it  was  clearly  impossible  for  John 
to  carry  out  the  principle  of  representation  in  pre- 
cisely the  same  manner  as  either  Daniel,  who  de- 
velops it  in  the  wrestling  of  the  fonr  winds  that  bring 
up  four  monsters,  or  Zechariah  in  the  two  mountains 
that  stand  and  permit  four  chariots  to  emerge  from 
between  them.  He  develops  the  principle,  however, 
in  the  way  in  which  it  was  competent  for  him  to  do 
it,  and  the  only  way  that  stands  in  consistency  with 
the  outward  form  of  his  pi'ophecy.  His  prophecy 
is  a  seven-sealed  book,  containing  a  series  of  visions, 


OFFICE   OF  THE  LIVING-CREATTJKES.  237 

closely  resembling  in  character  and  design  those  seen 
by  Daniel  and  Zechariah,  which  were  not  contained 
in  a  book.  In  the  Revelation  there  is  a  preiixment 
to  the  great  seven-sealed  book,  which  contains  its 
visions  of  what  may  be  called  the  frontispiece  of  the 
figures  of  the  Four  Living-creatures.  It  is  by  this 
act  impressed  with  that  same  stamp  of  unity,  which 
is  manifested  by  the  introductions  of  Daniel  and 
Zechariah.  The  same  lessons  are  taught  by  the 
design  of  this  frontispiece,  which  are  expressed  by 
the  four  winds  of  Daniel,  that  contend  on  the  sea,  and 
the  two  mountains  of  Zechariah  that  solidly  stand. 
"We  see  here  the  same  Spirit  of  God  at  work,  fashion- 
ing the  varied  imagery  of  the  prophets  to  convey  the 
same  idea,  and  also  to  develop  the  same  harmony  of 
design  throughout  his  handiwork.  We  see  liim  in 
the  Revelation  overmastering,  with  marvellous  in- 
genuity and  skill,  a  difficulty  which  presented  itself 
in  the  outward  form  of  this  prophecy,  and  character- 
izing the  different  moral  qualities  of  the  dominions 
by  a  wonderful  adaptation  of  the  forms  of  the  living- 
creatures  to  achieve  the  contemplated  design.  In 
the  introduction  of  the  Revelation  this  characteriza- 
tion is  performed  in  a  more  masterly  manner,  and 
accomplished  with  greater  success  than  in  the 
prophets  referred  to ;  the  whole  subject  of  the 
prophecy  is  here  developed  perfect  in  member  and 
in  organ,  although  in  miniature.  The  winds  and  the 
mountains  of  Daniel  and  Zechariah  are  in  compari- 
son of  the  living-creatures  of  the  Revelation  desti- 
tute of  significance ;  these  latter  are  symbols  in  the 


OFFICE   OF  THE   LIYING-CKEATUEES. 

liigliest  degree  sensitive ;  they  are  alive  with  intelli- 
gence. 

But  the  fourth  purpose  and  meaning  of  this  intro- 
duction is  probably  the  most  important,  not  indeed 
in  reference  to  the  prophecies  of  Daniel  and  Zecha- 
riah,  which  are  comparatively  short  and  simple,  and 
are  interpreted,  but  in  regard  to  the  Eevelation, 
which  is  long  and  complex,  and  uninterpreted.  This 
is  to  develop  the  quaternal  structure  of  the  prophecy. 
This  development  is  very  plainly  made  in  both  the 
prophecies  already  referred  to  of  Daniel  and  Zecha- 
riah.  The  origination  of  the  subject  is  made  from  a 
symbol  of  dominion  in  the  full  and  ]3erfect  form,  which 
is  the  fourfold,  and  the  subject  has  in  both  instances, 
in  perfect  consistency  with  this  representation,  a  four- 
fold division.  The  full  symbol  of  dominion  in  both 
instances  (in  the  one  represented  by  the  two  moun- 
tains) originates  four  subjects.  To  these  four  sub- 
jects exclusively  the  proj^hecy  of  Zechariah  adheres. 
Daniel,  in  his  prophecy,  brings  in  what  is  apparently 
a  fifth  subject  or  a  dominion,  which  occupies  the 
place  of  the  fifth  to  the  preceding  four  ;  but  he  repre- 
sents this  fifth  dominion  in  such  a  manner,  that  it 
stands  by  itself  outside  of  the  fourfold  group,  which  is 
preserved  unbroken,  nor  does  he  anywhere  denomi- 
nate this  latter  the  fifth.  It  is  much  more  to  be 
regarded  as  forming  a  second  quaternary.  The  king- 
dom of  God,  which  this  dominion  is,  is  a  jperfect  do- 
minion, and  four  being  the  full  number  of  dominion, 
it  may  in  this  symbolic  sense  be  regarded  as  fourfold. 
Perhaps  this  fifth  subject  of  Daniel  is  to  be  regarded 


OFFICE  OF  THE  LIVING- CREATURES.  239 

as  an  appendix  in  figurative  language,  added  to  the 
strictly  symbolic  prophecy  which  will  thus  restrict 
itself  exclusively  to  the  four  dominions.  It  is  certain 
that  in  this  prophecy  the  fifth  subject  cannot  be  held 
to  be  represented  by  any  symbol  in  the  strict  sense 
of  the  term.  Unquestionably,  however,  it  is  rep- 
resented by  a  symbol  in  the  parallel  prophecy,  ch.  ii. 
If  viewed  in  this  light  this  prediction  of  Daniel  must 
be  admitted  to  manifest  a  certain  deviation  from  the 
perfectly  normal  quaternal  form  of  symbolic  rep- 
resentation. There  is,  also,  a  certain  want  of  unity 
of  design  in  it  in  so  far  that  the  fifth  subject  is  not 
originated,  as  is  the  case  w^ith  the  preceding  four. 
It  will,  however,  be  relieved  of  both  these  apparent 
deficiencies,  if  we  regard  the  fifth  subject  as  treated 
of  in  literal  and  figurative  language.  The  symbol 
for  tlie  fifth  subject  in  ch.  ii.  may  then  be  regarded 
as  forming  to  that  prophecy  a  second  quaternary,  so 
that  the  quaternal  structure  will  there  be  exhibited 
in  a  duplicate  form.  "Whether  a  slight  infringement 
of  the  law  of  the  quaternal  structure  be  here  held  or 
not,  it  is  perfectly  evident  that  this  law  is  in  the 
main,  and  in  all  important  respects,  recognized  in  the 
structure  of  the  prophecy.  It  does  not  follow  that 
every  symbolic  prophecy,  or  that  any  one,  should  ex- 
hibit the  lean  ideal  of  the  art,  or  manifest  a  perfect 
and  undeviating  adherence  to  its  rules.  It  is  sufli- 
cient  that  they  are  in  the  main  regarded. 

In  the  Revelation,  however,  we  may  expect  a 
near  approach  to  this  perfection,  for  there  is  here  the 
highest,  the  most  finished,  and  the  most  elaborate 


240  OFFICE   OF  THE   LlVrN-G-CEEATUKES. 

development  of  the  symbolic  art,  as  all  who  have 
studied  the  book  are  agreed.  The  four  living-crea- 
tures then  introducing  and  originating  four  subjects 
in  an  analogous  manner,  with  Daniel  and  Zechariah, 
we  may  reasonably  expect  that  the  prophecy  to  which 
such  an  introduction  is  prefixed,  will  restrict  itself 
exclusively  to  these  four  subjects.  'Nor  do  we  find 
ground  in  it  to  suppose  either  the  slightest  infringe- 
ment of  the  law  of  the  quaternal  structure,  or  any 
compromise  of  the  principle  of  unity  of  design. 
There  is  indeed  a  second  group  of  four  figures,  in  chs. 
xii.  and  xiii. ;  but  it  is  apparent  from  the  descriptions 
that  these  are  reduplications  of  the  former,  while  the 
very  fact  that  this  group  is  neither  introduced  nor 
originated  from  a  common  symbol,  is  conclusive  evi- 
dence that  they  are  such.  It  would  be  to  suppose  a 
flagrant  violation  of  all  unity  of  design,  which,  in  this 
book,  is  quite  inconceivable,  to  assume  a  second  qua- 
ternary in  it,  which  is  neither  introduced  nor  origi- 
nated from  a  common  symbol,  as  is  the  manner  with 
the  first  group.  But  the  whole  prophecy  contradicts 
such  an  assumption  and  such  an  interpretation.  The 
beginning,  middle,  and  end  of  the  prophecy,  as  has 
already  been  shown,  exhibits  four,  and  no  more  than 
four,  agents  or  actors  in  its  plan.  Four  combatants 
open  the  book,  and  four  combatants  close  it;  three 
of  whom  are  cast  by  tlie  conquering  horseman  into 
the  lake  of  fire  ;  and  no  other  main  or  ^^rincipal  sub- 
ject, which  enters  into  its  plan,  is  discernible  in  the 
book  at  all. 

The  apprehension  of  the  quaternal  structure  pre- 


OFFICE    OF   THE   LR'ING-CREATUEES.  241 

sents  at  once  a  key  by  which  to  discover,  and  a 
touchstone  by  which  to  test  the  true  application  and 
bearing  of  a  very  great  portion  of  the  symbolical 
pictures,  in  a  long  and  complex  prophecy  such  as 
the  Eevelation.  It  introduces  into  these  a  principle 
of  order  and  arrangement.  It  is  at  the  same  time  an 
efficient  subordinate  key  to  that  grand  key  to  the  in- 
terpretation, which  lies  in  the  apprehension  of  the 
unity  of  design  of  the  piece.  It  is  in  all  essential 
respects  an  important  landmark  in  the  country  which 
is  being  explored. 

A  fifth  and  last  purpose  of  the  introduction  and 
origination  of  the  subject,  is  to  impress  the  prophecy 
with  unity.  Clearly  no  expedient  could  so  effectual- 
ly represent  the  perfect  unity  of  the  subject  as  the 
attribution  to  it  of  a  common  origin.  The  four  em- 
pires of  Daniel  and  Zechariah  are  impressed  with 
unity,  by  being  represented  as  evolved  from  a  com- 
mon symbol  of  dominion,  while  the  prophecy  itself 
is  invested  with  unity  by  the  same  method  of  repre- 
sentation. The  prophecy  has  a  noble  unity  of  design 
imparted  to  it ;  it  shoots  up  like  a  plant  or  a  tree, 
which  spreads  out  its  branches,  which  are  four  in 
number,  which  bear  fruits  which  are  manifold,  but 
branches,  leaves,  and  fruit,  are  all  connected  with 
one  parent-stem.  There  is  here  a  beautiful  simplicity 
and  unity  of  design  manifested.  "W^e  see  here  that 
symbolical  prophecy  borrowing  her  objects  from  na- 
ture, borrows  likewise  the  principles  of  her  art  from 
the  same  nature.  But  this  principle  is  not  more 
beautiful  than  it  is  useful.  It  enables  the  mind  to 
11 


242  OFFICE   OF  THE  LIVING-CREATUEES. 

trace  out  the  subject  wliicli  ramifies  itself.  "When 
the  mind  has  once  got  hold  of  a  part  of  the  subject,  it 
may,  by  diligence  and  perseverance,  ferret  out  the 
whole.  But  its  chief  value  lies  in  the  confirmation 
and  demonstration  which  it  aifords  to  the  meaning. 
The  introduction  and  origination  of  the  subject,  then, 
is  an  element  in  symbolic  prophecy  as  useful  as  it  is 
ornamental. 

But  the  structure  of  the  Revelation  in  the  quater- 
nal  forms  manifests  at  once  a  surpassing  beauty,  and 
a  sublime  simplicity.  ISTor  is  the  structure  itself  des- 
titute of  utility,  for  its  summit  commands  an  exten- 
sive prospect,  and  opens  up  to  the  eye  a  full  view  of 
the  prophetic  country.  If  we  approach  the  edifice 
and  examine  its  base  more  narrowly,  we  behold,  in 
the  invitation  of  the  four  Living-creatures,  who  sum- 
mon the  prophet  to  "  come  and  see,"  four  pictures  on 
the  Seven-sealed  Book,  the  broad  four-sided  founda- 
tion-stone of  that  one  lofty  column,  which,  raising  it- 
self majestically  from  this  common  base,  shoots  heav- 
enward, in  the  unity  of  one  spire.  On  each  of  the 
four  sides  at  the  base  there  is  graven  the  image 
of  a  living-creature.  This 'living-creature  illustrates 
the  whole  side  of  the  column  on  which  it  is  im- 
printed. There  is  here  a  design  which  is  profound, 
and  which  is  pervaded  by  an  absolute  unity  of  idea. 
That  prophecy  which  possesses  all  the  unity  of  the 
obelisk  can  never  have  the  intricacy  of  the  labyrinth. 


CHAPTEK  lY. 

PARTIAL  DEVELOPMENTS  OF  THE  SECOND  SENSE  IN  THE 
FOKM  OF  INTERPKETATIONS  RENDERED. 

The  most  effectual  means,  however,  for  obtaining 
an  insight  into  tlie  true  meaning  of  an  allegory,  un- 
questionably is  tlie  taking  advantage  of  a  formal  dis- 
covery, wbicb  tlie  allegory  itself  sometimes  makes  of 
tlie  second  sense.  This  is  done  when  the  allegoric 
curtain  is  actually  lifted  up  by  the  hand  of  the  alle- 
gorist  himself,  and  a  veritable  view  is  afforded  of  the 
second,  the  remote,  but  the  real  picture.  Such  a  dis- 
covery is  for  the  most  part  either  less  or  more  made. 
It  rarely  happens  that  an  allegory  is  so  constructed 
that  some  indication  of  the  second  meaning  is  not 
given  in  it.  Either  an  apparently  casual  word  or 
phrase  let  fall,  suggests  it,  or  a  formal  development 
of  the  second  sense,  delivered  in  plahi  and  literal  lan- 
guage, makes  an  important  discovery  of  it.  These 
revelations,  more  or  less  partial,  point  the  mind  to 
the  track  the  allegory  pursues,  which,  as  it  always 
moves  in  one  line  of  thought,  may  be  followed  out 
through  its  whole  course,  provided  the  track  be  ad- 
hered to  with  the  same  consistency  which  the  alle- 
gory itself  is  known  to  observe,  and  provided  no  cross 


244  INTEEPRETATIONS  BENDEKED. 

path  is  struck  into,  leading  the  mind  away  from  that 
unity  of  conception  which  is  the  guiding  and  govern- 
ing principle  of  the  allegory.  We  shall  have  occa- 
sion afterwards  to  advert  to  a  cross  road,  in  the  shape 
of  a  supposed  interpretation,  which  has  been  entered 
into  by  a  great  majority,  nearly  the  whole  of  com- 
mentators, and  which  has  led  them  far  away  into  a 
region  which  the  hieroglyphics  of  the  prophets  do  not 
inhabit. 

In  ch.  xvii.,  the  Eevelation  lifts  up  a  very  con- 
siderable fold  of  the  allegorical  curtain,  in  which  its 
true  meaning  is  enshrouded,  and  displays  to  view  a 
whole  scene  in  the  second  true  and  real  sense.  This 
discovery  is  made  in  a  formal  interpretation,  deliver- 
ed to  John  by  the  angel,  in  the  following  words : 

"  And  the  angel  said  unto  me,  "Wherefore  didst 
thou  marvel  ?  I  will  tell  thee  the  mystery  of  the 
woman,  and  of  the  beast  that  carrieth  her,  which 
hath  the  seven  heads  and  ten  horns.  The  beast  that 
thou  sawest  was,  and  is  not ;  and  shall  ascend  out  of 
the  bottomless  pit,  and  go  into  perdition :  and  they 
that  dwell  on  the  earth  shall  wonder,  whose  names 
w^ere  not  written  in  the  book  of  life  from  the  founda- 
tion of  the  world,  when  they  behold  the  beast  that 
was,  and  is  not,  and  yet  is.  And  here  is  the  mind 
which  hath  wisdom.  The  seven  heads  are  seven 
mountains,  on  which  the  woman  sitteth.  And  there 
are  seven  kings  :  five  are  fallen,  and  one  is,  and  the 
other  is  not  yet  come  ;  and  when  he  cometh,  he  must 
continue  a  short  space.  And  the  beast  that  was,  and 
is  not,  even  he  is  the  eighth,  and  is  of  the  seven,  and 


INTERPRETATIONS  RENDERED. 


245 


goetli  into  perdition.  And  the  ten  horns  which  thou 
sawest  are  ten  kings,  which  have  received  no  king- 
dom as  yet ;  but  receive  power  as  kings  one  hour 
with  the  beast.  Tliese  have  one  mind,  and  shall  give 
their  power  and  strength  unto  the  beast.  These  shall 
make  war  with  the  Lamb,  and  the  Lamb  shall  over- 
come them  :  for  he  is  Lord  of  lords,  and  King  of 
kings :  and  they  that  are  wifli  him  are  called,  and 
chosen,  and  faithful.  And  he  saith  unto  me.  The 
waters  which  thou  sawest,  where  the  whore  sitteth, 
are  peoples,  and  multitudes,  and  nations,  and  tongues. 
And  the  ten  horns  which  thou  sawest  upon  the  beast, 
these  shall  hate  the  whore,  and  shall  make  her  deso- 
late and  naked,  and  shall  eat  her  flesh,  and  burn  her 
with  fire.  For  God  hath  put  in  their  hearts  to  fulfil 
his  will,  and  to  agree,  and  give  their  kingdom  unto 
the  beast,  until  the  words  of  God  shall  be  fulfilled. 
And  the  woman  which  thou  sawest  is  that  great  city, 
Avhich  reigneth  over  the  kings  of  the  earth."— Kev. 
xvii.  7-18. 

Now  it  would  not  be  very  difficult  to  show  that 
this  passage  presents  a  key  to  the  whole  allegory,  and 
that  all  the  principal  points  of  it  may  be  made  out 
from  this  single  interpretation,  by  a  system  of  legiti- 
mate deduction.  The  Seven-headed  Ten-horned  Beast 
is  explained  by  the  angel  to  be  a  great  Koman  tem- 
poral power,  succeeding  that  great  Eoman  imperial 
power  which,  as  the  angel  affirmed,  was  in  existence 
at  the  time  when  he  was  speaking.  This  explanation 
is  delivered  in  language  as  plain  as  can  be  conceived, 
short  of  the  actual  naming  of  the  subject— an  ex- 


246  INTERPRETATIONS   RENDERED. 

treme  plainness  usually  foreign  to  the  interpretations 
of  Scripture.  The  seven  lieads,  whicli  are  said  to  pre- 
figure seven  mountains,  or  hills,  constitute  an  unde- 
niable characteristic  of  Rome,  the  seven-hilled  city. 
The  characteristic  is  meaningless  in  every  other  ap- 
plication. The  heads  are  said  to  prefigure  also  seven 
kings,  tliat  is,  according  to  prophetical  use  (see  fassirri) 
seven  different  and  distinct  dominions,  or  successive 
forms  of  dominion.  Five  of  these  had  fallen  when 
the  angel  was  speaking,  which,  as  enumerated  up  till 
Augustus,  the  first  emperor,  by  Livy  and  Tacitus,* 
two  Roman  historians,  who  cannot  be  regarded  other- 
wise than  as  impartial  witnesses  to  the  truth  of  a 
Christian  prophecy,  are  kings,  consuls,  dictators,  de- 
cemvirs, and  tribunes  ;  the  sixth,  viz.,  the  empire, 
was  then  in  existence — further  conclusive  evidence, 
if  any  were  w^anting,  that  a  Roman  dominion  is  sym- 
bolized by  the  Beast,  and  the  empire  by  its  sixth 
head,  for  the  Roman  empire  was  the  only  dominion 
then  existing  in  the  w^orld  at  all,  which  can  be  con- 
ceived to  have  had  any  place  in  Scrij)tural  prophecy. 

*  "  Qu£e  ab  condita  urbe  Roma  ad  captam  eandem  urbem  Ro- 
mani  sub  regibus  primum,  consulibus  deinde  ac  dictatoribus, 
decemvirisque  ac  tribunis  consularibus  gessere."  Livii,  1.  6,  c.  1. 
"  Urbem  Romam  a  principio  reges  habuere.  Libertatem  et  con- 
sulatum  L.  Brutus  instituit.  Dictaturse  ad  tempus  sumebantur : 
neque  Decemviralis  potestas  ultra  biennium,  neque  tribunorum 
militum  consulare  jus  diu  valuit.  Non  Cinnae,  non  Sullee  longa 
dominatio :  et  Pompeii  Crassique  potentia,  cito  in  Csesarem ; 
Lepidi  atque  Antonii  arma,  in  Augustum  cessere :  qui  cuncta 
discordiis  civilibus  fessa,  nomine  principis  sub  imperium  accepit." 
Tacit.  Annal.  1.  1. 


INTEKPKETATIONS   EENDERED.  247 

Its  magnitude,  comprising  ten  kingdoms  nnder  it,  is 
equally  conclusive  evidence  to  the  same  effect ;  for 
no  dominion  correspondent  in  size  to  tlie  description, 
lias  appeared  in  the  world  since  the  date  of  the  proph- 
ecy, which  is  not  Eoman.  But  the  Empire  then  ex- 
isting is  to  fall,  is  to  be  followed  by  a  seventh  form, 
which  is  to  last  only  a  short  time,  and  to  be  followed 
by  that  prefigured  by  the  Beast  itself,  which  form  is 
the  eighth,  and  yet  is  of  the  seventh,  i.  e.  is  a  domin- 
ion of  the  city  of  the  seven  hills,  although  there  is 
no  special  head  to  represent  it,  the  number  having 
been  exhausted  by  the  previous  forms.  There  is  here 
apparent  an  inadequacy  on  the  part  of  the  symbolic 
machinery,  naturally  somewhat  cumbrous,  unpliant, 
and  intractable  as  it  is,  perfectly  to  square  with  the 
unyielding  facts  of  history ;  an  inadequacy  which  is 
here  supplemented  by  the  literal  description  of  the 
angel.  This  last  dominion  is  an  enormous  one,  like  the 
Empire  encircling  ten  kingdoms  in  its  sphere.  It  is  in 
combination  with  an  ecclesiastical  power,  represented 
hj  a  Whore,  and  prefigured  by  the  seven-hilled  city 
itself,  a  city  being  in  the  book  a  symbol  of  a  church. 
This  church  prefigured  by  the  city,  "  reigneth  over  the 
kings  of  the  earth."  The  name  equally  of  the  Whore 
and  of  the  city,  is  Bab^don,  a  name  mystically  used  for 
Rome  by  the  earl}^  Christians.  This  double  domin- 
ion, this  great  combined  temporal  and  ecclesiastical 
power,  is  in  existence  at  the  late  period  of  the 
prophecy  which  follows  the  opening  of  the  seven 
vials,  that  is,  after  1260  years  have  elapsed,  for  the 
vials  of  the  last  plagues  cannot  be  conceived  to  be 


24:8  INTEEPEETATIONS   BENDERED. 

poured  out  until  these  years  have  elapsed.  It  follows 
that  the  dominion  in  question  must  be  found  existing 
at  a  period  at  least  later  than  the  fourteenth  century 
of  the  Christian  era.  The  kings  or  kingdoms  which 
were  subject  to  it,  are  in  the  end  to  turn  upon  it, 
and  further  its  dissolution.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
that  the  Eoman  Papacy,  as  a  temporal  power,  pre- 
figured by  the  Beast  itself,  and  also  by  its  eighth  and 
last  head,  assuming  supreme  temporal  authority,  and 
the  Papacy  as  the  head  of  the  Komish  Church,  pre- 
figured by  the  Whore,  assuming  supreme  sjjiritual 
power  over  the  Roman-European  kingdoms,  are  rep- 
resented together  in  one  compound  symbol.  The 
symbolical  portraiture  is  meaningless  with  every 
other  application. 

But  the  above  interpretation  avails  for  the  Two 
Beasts  in  ch.  xiii.,  because  the  symbols  in  both  places 
are  synonymous  in  sense  ;  one  of  the  symbols,  the 
Beasty  is  identical,  while  the  Whore  is  represent- 
ed by  the  thoroughly  correspondent  symbol  of  the  Two- 
horned  Beast.  The  same  interpretation  is  valid  also 
for  the  main  characteristics  of  the  Dragon,  because  it 
likewise  has  Seven  Heads  and  Ten  Horns.  The 
Dragon,  on  the  same  grounds,  must  also  be  concluded 
to  be  a  Roman  dominion.  But  it  precedes  the  Papacy 
at  its  seat,  which  is  Rome,  for  the  Beast  entered  into 
the  abandoned  seat  of  the  Dragon,  ch.  xiii.  2,  and  it 
is  contemporaneous  with  it,  for  it  persecutes  the 
woman  for  the  same  1260  years  as  the  Beast  makes 
war  on  the  saints,  ch.  xii.  14  ;  ch.  xiii.  5,  while  it 
outlives  it,  for  it  is  destroyed  subsequently  to  the 


INTEKPRETATIONS   EENDEEED.  24:9 

Beast  and  tlie  False  Prophet,  cli.  xx.  10.  The  Dragon, 
then,  can  plainly  alone  represent  the  Roman  Empire, 
as  this  empire  existed  first  of  all  in  Italy,  which  it 
was  forced  to  abandon  and  resign  to  the  Papacy,  as 
referred  to,  ch.  xiii.  2,  and  as  this  empire  existed 
thereafter  in  Germany  in  the  form  of  the  so-called 
Holy  Poman  Empire.  This  change  of  its  locality  is 
particularly  described  in  a  special  vision,  ch.  xii.  7- 
17,  under  the  symbolic  imagery  of  the  casting  of  the 
Dragon  out  of  heaven  upon  the  earth — the  heaven 
naturally  and  necessarily  in  regard  to  this  political 
power  symbolizing  metropolitan  Italy,  and  the  earth 
naturally  representing  provincial  Germany.  The 
same  mighty  and  disastrous  eclipse  of  power  and 
descent  from  lofty  position,  is  unquestionably  repre- 
sented by  the  judgment  of  the  fourth  trumpet,  ch. 
viii.  12,  and  alluded  to  as  above,  ch.  xii.  2.  Now  the 
Dragon,  Beast,  and  Whore,  or  Two-horned  Beast  or 
False  Prophet,  the  three  last  terms  being  synonymous 
designations,  comprehend  the  three  enemies  of  the 
Conqueror  on  the  White  Horse.  But  these  are  all 
his  enemies.  Accordingly,  the  main  features  of  the 
plan  or  plot  of  the  allegory  are  discernible  from  this 
interpretation. 

But  a  very  important  lesson  is  to  be  drawn  from 
this  specimen-interpretation,  as  it  may  be  properly 
considered,  afforded  by  the  angel,  besides  the  partic- 
ular information  which  it  yields.  It  teaches  by 
an  express  example  that  political  significations  alone 
are  to  be  put  upon  the  symbols.  The  angel  does 
this,  and  it  can  hardly  be  doubted  that  he  does 
11* 


250  INTERPEETATIONS   EENDEKED. 

it  as  an  example  to  be  followed,  since  there  is  not  a 
single  hint  given  to  pursue  a  diiferent  course.  It  is 
certain,  at  least,  that  those  who  apply  the  prophecy 
to  events  strictly  of  a  political  character,  in  the  man- 
ner of  the  interpreting  angel,  walk  by  a  precedent 
established  in  the  book  itself. 

But  if  unity  of  conception  is  admitted  to  be  an 
essential  principle  of  the  allegory,  then  the  disclosure 
here  made  of  the  second  sense,  with  an  entirely  po- 
litical reference,  necessarily  involves  the  conclusion 
that  the  whole  prophecy  is  political.  It  cannot,  ac- 
cording to  a  fundamental  law  of  the  allegory,  deliver 
any  predictions  except  on  the  political  field,  for  the 
reason  that  it  has  uttered  predictions  once  upon  this 
field. 

These  considerations  would  undoubtedly  have 
weighed  with  the  great  majority  of  commentators, 
had  it  not  been  that  a  supposed  counter -interpretation 
appeared  to  authorize  them  to  pursue  a  different 
course  from  that  which  is  here  so  clearly  pointed  out. 
But  the  very  idea  of  a  counter-interpretation  casts  a 
strong  suspicion  on  the  validity  of  its  claim  to  its 
being  ranked  as  an  interpretation  at  all,  and  we  shall 
presently  see  that  this  claim  is  wholly  groundless. 

Besides  this  lengthened  explanation  furnished  by 
the  angel,  there  are  others  in  the  book  of  minor  im- 
portance and  of  a  less  definite  character,  all  of  which, 
however,  speak  the  same  language  in  regard  to  the 
main  subject  developed  in  the  prophecy. 

The  value  of  this  interpretation  is  very  great.  It 
is  clear  and  definite  in  the  highest  degree,  and  it  pours 


INTEEPRETATIONS  RENDERED.  251 

a  beam  of  light  upon  the  central  mysteries  of  the 
prophec}^,  showing  us  distinctly  who  the  three  ene- 
mies are  that  wrestle  with  the  Conqueror  on  the 
White  Horse.  It  is  well  known  who  this  Conqneror 
is  ;  it  is  well  known  from  this  interpretation  who  his 
tliree  enemies  are.  We  know,  accordingly,  what  the 
four  actors  are  in  the  plot  of  the  prophecy,  which  plot 
is  a  contest  of  a  victor  with  three  antagonists,  whom 
the  former  overcomes  and  destroys  by  casting  into  a 
lake  of  fire.  The  interpretation  lifts  the  allegoric 
mask  from  the  three  antagonists  of  the  Conqueror,  and 
it  unveils  three  of  the  actors  in  the  plot  of  tlie  alle- 
gory. It  accordingl}^  furnishes  a  most  important  key 
to  the  interpretation  of  the  whole  prophecy. 

But  the  most  important  value  perhaps  which  it 
possesses  is  the  rule  laid  down  by  it  applicable  to  all 
the  remanent  symbolical  imagery  of  the  book,  of 
which  no  formal  interpretation  is  rendered.  This  is 
to  apply  it  to  events  that  transpire  on  the  political 
arena.  The  precedent  established  by  the  angel  may 
justly  be  held  to  have  all  the  force  of  a  law,  w^hich, 
if  it  be  not  impiety,  is,  at  least,  an  outrage  on  com- 
mon sense  to  set  aside.  Here  is  a  book  partially  in- 
terpreted. Common  sense  decides  that  the  partial  in- 
terpretation is  a  guide  to  the  whole.  The  rule  which 
is  here  laid  down,  although  not  by  precept  but  by  ex- 
ample, is  only  in  unison  with  that  which  all  the  other 
interpretations  rendered  in  Scripture  afford,  so  that  it 
rests  on  the  basis  of  well-established  precedent.  At 
the  same  time  it  stands  in  harmony  with  every  thing 
that  is  to  be  learned  from   the  book  of  Kevelation 


252  INTEEPEETATIONS  EENDERED. 

itself.  Still  the  distinct  confirmation  in  resj)ect  of 
this  book,  the  enunciation  in  itself  of  a  principle 
which  prevails  in  other  symbolical  prophecies,  is  a 
matter  of  no  small  moment.  It  chalks  out  for  the  in- 
terpreter, by  the  authority  of  a  special  announce- 
ment, that  compact  and  definite  field  for  the  applica- 
tion of  the  hieroglyphics,  with  which  alone  they  are 
competent  to  grapple,  and  within  the  limited  bounds 
of  which  he  himself  cannot  make  any  very  extensive 
w^anderings.  It,  at  the  same  time,  points  out  to  him 
the  same  field  as  that  which  has  been  occupied  by  the 
other  symbolical  prophecies,  which  are  thus  made  to 
contribute  their  light  to  clear  up  the  mysteries  of  the 
Hevelation. 


CHAPTER  y. 

THE   SY^IBOL   SATAIT. 

There  can  be  little  clonbt  tlin,t  the  interpretation 
in  cli.  xvii.  was  designed  by  the  Spirit  of  God  to  cast 
its  radiance  over,  and  to  illuminate  by  its  light  the 
whole  book  of  the  prophecy.  It  is  by  far  the  longest 
interpretation  in  it ;  it  is  couched  in  language  which 
is  extremely  clear  and  definite,  and  it  explains  the 
meaning  of  two  of  the  enemies  of  the  great  Conqueror 
of  the  book,  and  it  leads  through  inference  to  the 
recoo:nition  of  a  third.  It  thus  elucidates  all  the 
enemies  of  the  Conqueror,  for  there  are  but  three,  of 
which  a  full-length  portraiture  is  given — three  which 
take  part  in  the  plan  and  the  catastrophe,  the  being 
cast  into  the  lake  of  fire. 

E'ow  no  formal  interpretation  is  required  of  any 
of  the  various  symbols  under  which  the  kingdom  of 
God,  which  is  the  great  Conqueror  of  the  book,  appears, 
because  the  description  of  these  is  mixed  up  with  literal 
language,  which  renders  interpretation  at  once  unne- 
cessary and  superfluous.  This  is  not  the  case  with  its 
enemies.  These  are  rej^resented  by  symbols  of  a  highly 
enigmatical  cast.     Though  it  is  to  be  learned  from  the 


254:  THE   SYMBOL   SATAN. 

text  that  they  are  enemies  of  this  kingdom,  it  is  not 
perceptible  who  the  enemies  are.  They  appear 
under  vizors  which  conceal  their  individuality.  What 
signify  the  seven  heads  and  the  ten  horns?  of  the 
real  meanins^  of  these  there  is  no  indication  to  be  ob- 
tained  from  any  part  of  the  descriptions  which  usually 
do,  in  language  to  be  taken  literally,  throw  light 
upon  the  symbols.  In  regard  to  the  sense  of  the 
seven  heads  and  ten  horns  there  reigns  a  profound 
darkness.  In  this  state  of  things  a  lengtlie^^  -  inter- 
pretation, delivered  in  literal  language,  steps  in  and 
throws  its  beams  of  light  upon  those  symbolical 
masks  in  which  the  three  enemies  fight,  and  whose 
features,  except  for  this  illumination,  would  have 
been  indiscernible.  The  seven  heads  and  ten  horns 
are  in  virtue  of  this  interpretation  clearly  identified 
as  signs  of  a  great  Roman  dominion. 

Now  as  the  seven  heads  and  ten  horns  belong 
equally  to  the  Dragon  and  the  Beast,  and  as  the 
Beast  is  in  combination  with  the  third  enemy,  it  fol- 
lows that  all  the  three  enemies  are  Roman.  Upon 
this  view,  then,  the  interpretation  in  ch.  xvii.  unveils 
the  political  and  individual  characters  of  the  three- 
fold enemy,  for  it  is  one  as  the  great  threefold  Roman 
dominion — the  fourth  of  the  world,  or  of  the  three 
Roman  enemies  with  which  the  kingdom  of  God  has 
to  contend, — individual  we  say  as  well  as  political,  for 
bv  characterizina:  them  as  Roman  it  individualizes 
them,  seeing  that  no  more  than  three  great  Roman 
dominions  have  appeared  in  history  since  the  date  of 
the  prophecy,  and  it  can  hardly  be  held  that  any 


THE   SYMBOL   SATAN. 


255 


oreat  Roman  dominion  is  yet  to  arise,  while  it  is  from 
the  symbolical  descriptions  evident  which  of  the 
three  is  designed  by  each  respective  portraiture. 
Upon  this  view  the  interpretation  in  ch.  xvii.  illu- 
minates a  great  portion  of  the  prophecy. 

It  is  a  standing  law  of  all  language  that  the  same 
sign  bears  the  same  signification.     The  application  of 
this  law  in  the  present  case  will  remove  an  obstacle 
to  the  right  interpretation  of  the  book  which,  so  long 
as  the  law  is  disregarded,  it  may  safely  be  alleged 
can  never  be  compassed.     The  obstacle  to  which  we 
refer  is  the  appropriation  of  the  symbol,  Satan.     The 
appropriation  of  this  symbol  by  the  great  majority  of 
commentators  has  not  been  rightly  made,  and  has 
been    the   source   of  irretrievable    confusion   to   the 
whole  imagery  of  the  book.     It  is  a  legitimate  deduc- 
tion from  the  above  law,  that  what  is  interpreted  to 
be  the  signification  of  seven  heads  and  ten  horns  in 
ch.   xvii.   holds  good  for  ch.   xii.,  as  these  symbols 
appear  in  the  Dragon,  and  that  designating  in   the 
former    passage    a    Roman    power,   they   designate 
the  same  power  in  the  latter.     This  is  a  legitimate 
conclusion,  based  on  a  law  fundamental  to  all  lan- 
guage, and  it  fixes  the  sense  of  the  Dragon.     But 
still  farther,  by  the  interpretation   in    ch.   xvii.  the 
political  field  is  distinctly  opened  up  for  the  allegory 
and  its  hieroglyphics.      The  Beast   and  the  Whore 
have  a  political  significance  ;  the  seven  heads  and 
ten  horns  have  the  same.     ISTow  as  unity  of  design 
and  conception  is  a  fundamental  and  essential  prin- 
ciple of  an  allegory,  we  are  led  to  infer  that  the 


256-  THE   SYMBOL   SATAN. 

whole  subject  will  be  political.     Now  these  are  not 
only  obvious  but  sound  and  stable  conclusions. 

J^evertheless  these  conclusions,  irrefragable  as 
they  appear  to  be,  are  rendered  nugatory  by  the 
application  given  to  a  single  passage  in  ch.  xii.  This 
passage,  as  understood,  obscures  the  light  which  the 
angel's  inter jDretation  throws  ujDon  the  Dragon ;  in- 
volves a  violation  of  a  ftindamental  law  of  symbolic 
representation,  unity  of  conception  ;  asserts — which  is 
a  violation  of  another  fundamental  law — that  the 
same  sit^n  does  not  bear  the  same  siij-nification ;  and 
opens  up  an  entirely  new  field  for  the  application 
of  the  symbols,  thereby  destroying  the  allegory  in 
which  they  appear,  and  which  holds  them  together — 
a  field  which  not  only  is  diverse,  so  that  the  sense  of 
the  hieroglyj)hics  is  likewise  destroyed,  but  which  is 
so  boundless  in  its  extent,  consisting  as  it  does  of 
the  relations  which  may  be  drawn  between  the  spirit- 
ual and  the  political  worlds,  that  it  would  require 
terms  of  metaphysical  exactitude  to  characterize 
them.  Yet  this  service  is  demanded  of  hierv^glyj^hics, 
signs  few  in  number,  and  the  range  of  which  is 
naturally  limited.  They  are  required  to  rej^resent 
not  only  the  relations  which  one  political  body  has  to 
another,  but  the  relations  which  these  bear  to  the 
spiritual  world.  Much  the  same  task  is  imposed 
upon  them  as  if  the  signs  of  the  Zodiac  were 
made  to  rejDresent  not  only  the  relations  of  the 
heavenly  bodies  to  one  another,  but  to  describe  also 
the  parallaxes  which  they  bear  to  the  earth  or  might 
bear.     It  is  sufiicient  to  say  that  they  cannot  do  work 


THE  SY:MB0L  SATAN.  257 

such  as  this.  Few  in  number,  these  signs  have  not 
even  the  aid  of  an  allegory  to  sustain  them  in  the 
gigantic  task,  for  this  likewise  has  been  destroyed. 
The  whole  hieroglyphic  language,  accordingly,  falls 
into  ruins.  This  is  a  serious  evil.  It  requires  the 
interpreter  to  pause  ere  he  gives  to  a  single  passage 
a  sense  which  entails  such  disastrous  consequences. 

The  guilty  passage  to  which  we  refer,  or  more 
properly  the  guilty  interpretation  of  it,  involving  the 
crime  of  the  flagitious  character  above  described, 
unveils,  according  to  the  assumed  acceptation  of  its 
meaning,  a  second  sense  diametrically  opposed  to 
that  which  we  have  been  considering,  and  opens  up 
an  entirely  new  field  for  the  symbols.  The  seven- 
headed,  ten-horned  Beast  stands  for  a  great  political 
empire,  with  ten  kingdoms  in  it,  as  is  interpreted, 
ch.  xvii.  ;  the  seven-headed,  ten-horned  Dragon,  ac- 
cording to  the  assumed  signification  of  the  words,  is 
Satan  liimself.  This  is  a  serious  matter.  The  Devil 
is  in  the  Eevelation  in  person,  walking  amongst  po- 
litical symbols,  and  has,  comparatively  speaking, 
wrought  as  much  evil  in  it  as  he  did  in  paradise. 
However,  upon  a  close  examination  we  shall  find  the 
fears  naturally  resulting  from  such  a  conception  to 
be  groundless,  and  that  the  Devil  has  only  got  into 
the  prophetical  part  of  the  book  where  alone  he  can 
do  an}^  harm  symholically. 

The  words  in  whicli  the  Devil's  presence  in  the 
book  is  held  to  be  indicated  are  the  following : 

"  And  the  great  dragon  was  cast  out,  that  old 
serpent  called  the  Devil,  and  Satan,  which  deceiveth 


258  THE   SYMBOL    SATAN. 

the  whole  world :  he  was  cast  ont  into  the  earth,  and 
his  angels  were  cast  out  with  him." 

Here  is  the  Devil,  it  is  said ;  the  book  expressly 
states  that  the  Dragon  is  the  Devil,  and  whom  are 
we  to  believe  if  not  the  prophet  himself?  Now  in 
reply  to  ihis  statement,  which  is  generally  made  with 
a  boldness  and  curtness  which  seem  to  set  contradic- 
tion at  scorn,  one  should  be  inclined  to  say,  not  over- 
hastily,  and  point  to  such  passages  where  it  is  said, 
"  here  is  the  mind  which  hath  wisdom,"  and,  "  let 
him  that  hath  understanding  count  the  number  of  the 
beast,"  and  suggest,  that  here  also  there  may  be  wis- 
dom to  be  exercised,  and  that  here  also  there  may 
and  indeed  there  must  lie  wisdom  concealed  under- 
neath these  words,  whose  plain  and  obvious  meaning 
is  foolishness  to  the  prophecy,  and  dissolution  to  its 
language. 

It  is  no  doubt  more  easy,  simple,  and  childlike  to 
take  the  words  in  their  plain  meaning  and  obvious 
sense  ;  but  then  it  is  to  be  borne  in  mind  this  is  not 
the  sense  of  the  book,  which  is  enigmatical.  That 
it  is  such  is  apparent  from  the  whole  style  of  it,  as 
well  as  from  the  incitements  which  the  prophet  affords 
to  stir  ns  np  to  the  exercise  of  our  intellectual  facul- 
ties in  the  discovery  of  his  meaning  which  is  hidden. 
A  mere  idleness-loving  disposition  to  accept  the  first, 
plain,  easy,  and  obvious  sense,  without  any  farther 
trouble,  is  clearly  not  the  spirit  in  which  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  Revelation  is  to  be  approached. 

ISTow  to  the  above  statement  that  there  is  an  inter- 
pretation of  the   symbol,  the   Dragon,  to   be  taken 


THE   SYMBOL   SATAIT.  259 

literally — a  statement  which  is  advanced  with  great 
confidence  by  those  who  make  it,  and  in  such  a  man- 
ner as  if  it  appeared  to  them  to  preclude  argument 
on  the  subject,  we  shall,  nevertheless,  take  the  liberty 
of  statins:  two  reasons  which  will  not  a  little  shake  it. 
AYe  shall  then  state  and  prove  the  real  interpreta- 
tion which  is  at  variance  with  it.  But  before  we 
proceed  to  this  object,  let  us  weigh  once  more  the 
2)erils  of  accepting  these  words  in  their  literal  sense, 
and  consider  whether  these  perils  in  themselves  do 
not  furnish  a  valid  objection  against  it. 

Let  it  be  admitted  that  this  is  a  real  interpreta- 
tion, and  that  the  rule  observed  by  Scripture  is  to 
deliver  ^n  interpretation  literally;  even  then  we 
should  feel  authorized  to  make  the  passage  an  ex- 
ception to  the  rule,  on  the  ground,  simply,  that  it  is 
impossible  that  Satan,  the  Spirit,  can  be  prefigured 
by  a  symbol  so  entirely  analogous  to  a  Seven-headed 
Ten-horned  Beast,  which  is  interpreted  by  the  angel 
to  represent  a  political  dominion,  as  a  Seven-headed 
Ten-horned  Dragon  certainly  is.  The  two  symbols 
are  as  analogous,  as  well  can  be ;  the  applications 
are  as  different  as  can  well  be  conceived.  Besides,  it 
may  be  regarded  as  clearly  not  in  the  power  of  any 
statement  whatever,  no  matter  how  express  it  may 
be,  to  establish  a  sense  wdiich  involves  the  dissolu- 
tion of  the  language  in  which  it  is  contained;  be- 
cause it  is  then  suicidal  to  its  own  authority.  It 
may  likewise  be  added  that  no  sense  in  an  allegorical 
composition  can  be  admitted  which  destroys  the  alle- 
gory.   But  both  of  these  results  follow  if  we  are  to 


260  THE   SYMBOL   SATAN. 

accept  the  averment  made,  that  the  Dragon  is  here 
interpreted  to  be  Satan  the  Spirit.  However  strong 
the  reasons  then  might  be,  which  are  here  in  the 
last  degree  meagre  and  frivolous,  for  accepting  the 
supplemental  designations  which  are  given  of  the 
Dragon,  in  the  verse  above  quoted,  as  an  identifica- 
tion of  this  symbol  with  Satan,  it  is  impossible,  from 
the  nature  of  the  case,  that  they  counterveil  the 
reasons  for  rejecting  it.  These  reasons,  even  if  they 
were  strong,  must  bend  before  a  reason  which  is 
stronger. 

The  intelligibility  of  the  symbolic  language  w^hicli 
is  destroyed  by  the  effect  of  the  above  statement,  is  a 
priceless  gem  which  must  be  sacredly  upheld  by  the 
interpreter.  If  the  prophecy  has  no  intelligible  lan- 
guage it  is  clearly  no  prophecy,  and  more  than  this, 
it  contains  no  sense.  But  let  these  w^ords  be  taken 
literally,  and  what  results  ?  As  with  a  tempest-sweep, 
the  symbolic  imagery  is  cast  adrift  from  its  moorings, 
and  becomes  the  prey  of  the  winds  and  waves  of 
imagination.  The  political  anchors  loosened  from,  as 
fixed  in  ch.  xvii.,  the  w^hole  fleet  of  splendid  and  mag- 
nificent imagery  sails  away  under  the  gale,  might  it 
not  rather  be  said,  the  tempest  of  fancy,  commenta- 
tors hoisting  a  press  of  canvas  upon  a  voyage  of  dis- 
covery into  the  spiritual  world,  that  is,  in  the  direction 
of  Cloudland.  From  this  country  the  navigators  re- 
turn, bringing  reports  at  once  uncertain  and  grotesque. 
Paganism  is  seen  flourisliing  in  one  place  ;  its  disso- 
lution is  predicted  in  another ;  Mahometanism  is 
found  in  one  place ;  Arianism  in  another ;  all  sorts 


THE   SYMBOL   SATAN.  261 

of  heresies  have  been  found  rampant,  while  Infidelity 
has  been  seen  stalking  about  in  the  form  of  Death  and 
the  Pale  Horse.  A  strange  medley  of  things  spiritual 
and  political  is  made  out  of  the  book ;  some  com- 
mentators apply  the  whole  of  it  in  a  spiritual  sense, 
and  {ties  and  isms  of  all  kinds  are  discoverable  in  it, 
spiritual  manifestations  being  in  the  highest  degree 
multiform.  Protean,  and  indefinite.  On  what  author- 
ity have  such  liberties  been  taken  with  the  interpre- 
tation of  this  divine  book  ?  On  the  authority  of  the 
interpretation,  as  it  is  called,  which  is  rendered  in  this 
passage.  The  prophet  himself,  it  is  said,  asserts  an 
important  symbol  in  his  book  to  be  spiritual.  Doubt- 
less the  interpretation  contained  in  ch.  xvii.,  which  is 
long  and  very  distinct,  and  which,  being  the  longer  and 
more  explicit  of  the  two,  ought  to  have  a  correspond- 
ing weight  attached  to  it,  refers  the  reader  to  the  po- 
litical world.  This,  however,  is  in  the  estimation  of 
many  comparatively  a  hard  and  dry  field ;  it  bears  as 
they  think  no  flowers,  and  it  is  even  thought  to  yield 
but  little  grain,  and  this  has  an  earthy  flavor ;  accord- 
ingly the  other  interpretation,  as  it  is  called,  is  looked 
on  with  predilection.  J^ow,  if  there  were  but  one 
real  interpretation,  and  this  referred  the  reader  to  the 
spiritual  world,  it  would  be  a  matter  of  less  moment 
and  there  would  still  be  hope  to  the  sense.  The  alle- 
gory would  still  preserve  unity,  and  its  language  con- 
sistency, although  the  spiritual  world  thus  opened  up 
is  boundless,  and  is  filled  with  innumerable  shadowy 
and  undefined  forms,  as  it  is,  which  are  but  ghosts,  and 
which  efi'ectually  elude  the  powers  of  hieroglyphics. 


262  THE   SYMBOL   SATAN. 

But  unfortunately  there  stands  the  interpretation  in 
ch.  xvii.,  which  assigns  a  share  in  the  prophecy  to  the 
political  world,  and  a  corner,  however  reluctantly,  must 
be  assigned  to  this  also.  The  wedge  of  the  catastrophe 
is  now  inserted,  and  the  prophecy  is  rent  in  twain.  Be- 
tween these  two  cross  fires  the  last  intelligible  vestige 
of  allegory  and  hieroglyphic  is  consumed.  The  book 
is  deprived,  at  once,  of  language  and  of  allegory. 

But  commentators  flourish  nnder  this  system,  for 
it  is  an  organized  sijstevi  of  interpretation  ;  one  writes 
a  book,  overthrowing  his  predecessor's  rendering  and 
setting  up  his  own,  which  falls  a  prey  to  his  immediate 
successor,  who  sets  up  his.  This  process  may  be,  and 
is,  carried  on  almost  to  an  infinitude.  It  is  i:)erfectly 
clear  that  an  infinite  number  of  meanings  may  be 
readily  educed  from  a  book  which  has  been  divested 
of  its  language,  and  which  has  no  principle  of  cohe- 
sion. A  language,  the  signs  of  which  rest  on  no 
fixed  basis,  can  signify  any  thing,  and  an  allegory 
from  which  the  allegory  has  been  taken  is  a  most 
pliant  species  of  composition,  and  will  do  its  master's 
bidding  like  an  Ariel. 

Now  the  Bevelation  has  long  sufifered  under  this 
deadly  blight  of  no  language^  or  what  is  the  same 
thing,  no  fixed  and  definite  sense  for  its  signs.  "We 
have  already  called  attention,  in  some  of  the  forego- 
ing pages  of  this  work,  to  one  of  the  causes  of  this 
MigJit^  to  wit,  the  ignoring  on  the  part  of  commen- 
tators, of  the  three  fundamental  laws  of  the  prophetic 
allegory,  unity  of  design,  reduplication,  and  the  qua- 
ternal  structure,  which  laws,  alone,  can  invest  the 


THE   SYMBOL   SATAN.  263 

signs  "with  the  definiteness  essential  to  meaning.  This 
cause,  however,  has  only  prevented  definiteness.  The 
assumption  that  the  Dragon  is  interpreted  by  the 
prophet  to  be  Satan,  has  been  the  cause  at  once  of 
indefiniteness  and  contradiction.  It  has  produced 
this  effect,  since  it  is  at  variance  with  the  interpreta- 
tions of  Scripture,  elsewhere  rendered ;  and,  because 
it  opens  up  a  new  and  diverse  field  for  the  application 
of  the  symbols.  But  it  has  been  admitted,  and  it  has 
accordingly  j^roduced  its  effects,  w^hich,  to  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  book,  have  been  disastrous.  The 
signs  of  its  language  have  not  only  been  deprived  of 
all  definiteness,  but  they  have  actually  been  envel- 
oped in  a  veil  of  indefiniteness^  while  their  features 
have  been  distorted  by  contradiction  so  that  they 
may  signify  any  thing,  and  so  that  in  reality  they 
mean  nothing.  Judicious  commentators,  without 
doubt,  deplored  this  state  of  things,  although,  not 
being  aware  of  the  remedy  as  long  as  the  assumed 
interpretation  stood  unassailed,  they  refrained  from 
characterizing  it.  So  far  as  we  are  aware,  however, 
they  never  represented  this  state  of  the  interpretation 
as  a  sound,  normal,  and  healthy  condition  of  things. 
They  subjected  the  patient  to  a  system  of  dietetics, 
but  they  never  announced-this  treatment  as  thorough- 
ly consistent  with  the  buoyancy  of  health.  But  so 
long  has  the  system  been  practised,  and  with  success 
to  the  practitioners,  although  to  the  detriment  of  the 
patient,  that  a  recent  physician,  bolder  than  his  pre- 
decessors, has  ventured  to  make  the  open  avowal  that 
no  language  for  the  book  is  its  proper  and  normal 


26i  THE   SYMBOL   SATAK. 

condition,  and,  that  an  interpretation  constructed 
upon  this  basis  is  sure  to  be  successful.  We  have 
characterized  Mr.  Stuart's  basis  of  interpretation  as 
mysterious  ;  we  believe  that  this  one  will  appear  to 
most  minds  to  be  liollow.  It  is  the  one,  however,  which, 
more  or  less,  is  followed  at  the  present  day,  but  it  has 
never  before  been  stated  with  so  laudable  an  honesty 
and  such  bewitching  simplicity.  The  writer  referred 
to  proclaims  the  proper  method  of  studying  the  Apoc- 
alypse to  be  the  following.     He  says : 

"  It  is  evident,  on  the  principles  which  we  have 
proclaimed,  that  we  do  not  expect  to  find  the  truth 
of  prophecy  by  adopting  any  particular  system  of 
interpretation  derived  from  a  supposed  uniform  mean- 
ing of  symbols,  or,  as  it  is  sometimes  called,  of  sym- 
bolical language.  Each  prophecy  is  to  be  explained 
by  itself — by  the  application  and  correspondence  of 
its  language,  or  figures,  or  signs,  to  the  events  which 
it  predicts,  and  which  have  fulfilled,  or  are  to  fulfil 
it.  In  that  explanation,  light  indeed  is  to  be  gath- 
ered from  prophecy  already  known  to  be  fulfilled,  or 
already  explained  by  Scripture.  If  we  cannot  arrive 
at  satisfactory  conclusions  by  this  method  of  study,  I 
think  it  plain  that  no  better  or  other  Tnethod  re- 
mains." * 

The  author  italicizes  the  method  himself.  The 
method,  however,  is  open  to  some  inconsistencies, 
which  are  sufiiciently  obvious  from  the  honesty  with 
which  its  features  are  displayed.     The  main  points, 

*  Lectures  on  the  Apocalypse,  by  Dr.  Butler. 


THE    SYMBOL   SATAN.  265 

and  the  inferences  to  "which  they  lead,  may  be  stated 
thus : 

1st.  The  symbols  which  convey  the  symbolical 
prophecies  of  Scripture  liave  no  uniform  meaning, 
and  therefore  form  no  language,  although  it  is  some- 
times called  symbolical  language ;  but,  as  the  author 
evidently  and  consistently  thinks,  improperly  so- 
called.  The  fundamental  axiom  thus  is,  that  the 
symbolical  prophecies  are  conveyed  in  710  language. 

2d.  Each  prophecy  is  to  be  explained  by  the  ap- 
plication and  correspondence  of  its  language  (?),  or 
figures,  or  signs,  (which  be  it  understood,  have  no 
uniform  meaning)  to  the  events  which  it  predicts,  or 
which  have  fulfilled  it.  This  is  perfectly  intelligible, 
although  its  practicability  is  somewhat  questionable. 
A  narrative,  for  example,  is  told  in  no  language,  but 
the  sense  of  the  language  is  to  be  discovered  from  the 
narrative.  A  prophecy  couched  in  no  language  pre- 
dicts events,  and  the  language  is  here  to  be  made  out 
from  the  events.  The  natural  query  of  course  arises, 
how  these  events  themselves  are  to  be  reco^'uized, 
wdiich  are  not  described  in  any  language.  The  suc- 
ceeding theorem  effectually  removes  the  difficulty, 
which  in  itself  would  be  fatal  to  the  method  by  ab- 
stracting its  remaining  leg,  if  leg  it  can  be  called, 
consisting  in  events  characterized  by  no  language,  and 
it  overthrows  the  method  altogether. 

Sd.  A  prophecy  is  to  be  explained  by  the  appli- 
cation and  correspondence  of  its  language  (being  no 
language)  to  events  which  are  to  fulfil  it.  Here  both 
the  language  and  the  events  vanish,  for  events  which 
12 


266  THE   SYMBOL   SATAN. 

are  future,  are  as  little  known  as  tlie  language,  so  that 
the  metliod  of  interpretation  is  left  without  any  mate- 
rials with  which  to  carry  on  its  method.  In  a  word, 
we  are  landed  in  the  truism,  which  is  self-evident 
that  no  language  is  to  1)6  exjylained  hj  nothing.  But 
why  does  the  author  take  a  route  so  circuitous,  to 
arrive  at  a  truism  of  this  kind  ?  The  irony  here  per- 
formed on  the  method  is  evidently  of  the  keenest  and 
most  cutting  description,  could  it  be  supposed  that 
the  author  designed  irou}^  ? 

Now  there  is,  perhaps,  no  process  of  ratiocination 
that  could  be  so  successful  in  exhibiting  the  absurdity 
of  the  way  (we  cannot  call  it  a  method)  of  interpreta- 
tion which  has  been  followed  for  a  long  period  of  time 
in  respect  of  the  Revelation,  and  which  this  writer 
also  follows,  as  this  naively  simple  and  upright  avowal 
of  it.  The  Christian  world  owe  a  deep  debt  of  grati- 
tude to  the  learned  author  for  exhibiting  the  system, 
for  witliout  principle,  it  is  a  system^  of  interpreting 
the  visions  of  John  which  has  been  hitherto  all  but 
universally  followed,  in  its  native  deformity  or  rather 
in  its  sheer  nothingness.  The  language  is  discover- 
able from  the  events!  An  idol  is  here  unveiled 
which  has  exerted  a  powerful  and  baneful  influence 
on  commentators  for  three  centuries,  and  it  is  seen  to 
be  an  idol.  Its  reign,  after  the  exposure  made  appa- 
rently by  one  of  its  own  worshippers,  may  be  regard- 
ed as  terminated.  The  book  of  Revelation,  it  is  to 
be  hoped,  is  now  once  for  all  delivered  from  a  ty- 
rant, beneath  whose  influence  it  has  been  to  the 
layman  a  cypher,  to  the  divine  a  thorn,  and  to 
the  infidel  a  jest.     Honesty  is  sometimes  of  greater 


THE  SYMBOL   SATAN.  267 

value  to  truth  than  mere  acumen.  The  author  in- 
deed has  bHndedly  and  audaciously  driven  his  steed, 
harnessed  and  in  full  armor,  into  the  black  and  friglit- 
ful  chasm  of  no  language  /  he  perishes  hitnself  as  an 
interpreter;  but  if  the  chasm  closes,  and  he  saves 
Rome,  let  him  enjoy  the  honors  of  the  Roman  mar- 
tyr. He  may  bear  the  palm  with  Curtius,  akhough 
not  with  Calvin.* 

Such  are  the  disastrous  consequences  of  admitting 
this  passage  to  be  an  interpretation ;  it  dissolves  the 
language  of  the  book  by  opening  up  to  its  signs  an 
extent  which  is  boundless  ;  in  a  word,  it  constitutes 
its  real  language  no  language^  and  lays  the  basis  for 
the  method  which  has  just  been  exploded. 

This  may  be  regarded  as  an  indirect  argument. 
But  we  proceed  to  advance  two  direct  arguments, 
which,  as  we  conceive,  neutralize  the  averment  that 
the  j)assage  in  question  delivers  an  interpretation  to 
be  taken  literally.  These  we  shall  put  in  the  form  of 
two  denials. 

1^^.  A  denial  that  interpretations  are  to  be  taken 
literally. 

^d.  A  denial  that  this  is  an  interpretation  at  all. 

After  setting  aside  the  claims  of  this  passage  to 
be  regarded  as  of  an  interpretory  nature,  we  shall 
then  proceed  to  show  and  prove  from  Scripture  what 
the  real  interpretation  is.     This  will  elevate  this  im- 

*  The  praise  awarded  by  Scaliger  to  Calvin  was,  that  com- 
menting on  the  other  books  of  Scripture,  he  refrained  from  all 
attempt  to  explain  the  Revelation,  and  thus  abstained  from  plac- 
ing his  credit  as  a  commentator  in  jeopardy.  Hence  it  passed 
into  an  adage,  Calvinus  sajntqiwdin  A^ocalypsin  non  scrij>8it. 


268  THE   SY^IBOL   SATAN. 

portant  sign  to  the  same  rank  which  the  other  sym- 
bols of  the  book  possess,  and  it  will  bring  the  book 
into  conformitj  with  itself  and  other  Scripture. 

Firstly,  ihen,  we  have  to  observe  that  tlie  inter- 
pretations rendered  in  Scripture  are,  for  the  most 
part,  couched  in  language  which  has  always  some 
portion  of  the  symbolic  elem.ent  in  it.  On  some  oc- 
casions this  element  pervades  it  entirely.  Of  this, 
the  most  notable  instance  is  the  answer  of  the  angel 
to  the  cpiestion  of  Zechariah,  eh.  vi.,  "  What  are 
these,  my  lord?"  And  the  angel  answered  and  said 
unto  me,  "  These  are  the  four  spirits  (or  winds)  of  the 
heavens  which  go  forth  from  standing  before  the 
Lord  of  all  the  earth."  Here  it  is  clear  that  one 
sjanbol  is  explained,  not  in  language  to  be  taken 
literally,  but  by  another.  In  the  interpretation  of  the 
Four  Beasts  of  Daniel  they  are  said  to  be  four  kings, 
ch.  vii.  17,  which  is  not  true  in  the  literal  sense,  as 
we  see  from  ver.  23,  and  the  corresponding  prophecy, 
ch.  ii.,  for  kingdoms  are  meant.  The  same  occurs  in 
this  book,  ch.  xvii.  10.  The  seven  kings  are  neither 
kings  nor  kingdoms  in  the  literal  sense,  as  is  admitted 
by  nearly  all  commentators,  nor  is  the  last  verse  of 
the  interpretation  to  be  taken  in  a  purely  literal  sense  ; 
or,  at  least,  a  second  mystical  sense  is  not  excluded 
from  it.  In  Zechariah,  chs.  iv.  and  v.,  there  are  sev- 
eral interpretations  rendered  to  the  prophet  wdiicli  are 
all  couched  in  language  highly  symbolic  and  mys- 
tical. The  evidence  from  Scripture,  then,  is  plainly 
against,  and  not  in  favor,  of  accepting  even  a  formal 
interpretation  in  the  purely  literal  sense. 


THE   SYMBOL    SATAN.  269 

But  secondly,  there  is  no  foundation  for  supposing 
tliat  the  words  form  an  interpretation,  or  that  tliere 
is  here  any  suspension  of  symbolic  representation.  We 
are  not  under  any  necessity  of  proving  this  position  ; 
we  are  at  liberty  to  assume  it,  tlie  prophecy  being 
symbolic,  and  the  symbolic  sense  being  tliat  which  is 
natural  and  germane  to  it.  The  language  employed 
is  such  as  would  be  used  were  the  symbol  undergo- 
ing, at  the  Jiands  of  the  prophet,  an  expansion  and 
variation.  lie  is  changing  the  symbol — the  Dragon 
— into  that  of  Satan.  lie  has  already  introduced 
Michael,  who  is  certainly  a  symbolic  personage,  which 
in  itself  is  evidence  that  Satan  is  symbolic.  Con- 
sistency in  the  representation  is  promoted  by  making 
the  antagonist  of  that  which  Michael  symbolizes,  also 
a  personage  ;  with  this  view  the  prophet  employs  Sa- 
tan instead  of  the  Draf^on. 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  that  Satan  is  an  interpre- 
tation, is  an  assumption  vrhich  requires  proof  Of 
this  position  we  have  not  seen  evidence  advanced,  ex- 
cepting that  wliich  lies  in  a  loud  and  long  vocifera- 
tion, re-echoed  by  one  commentator  after  another, 
that  the  prophecy  plainly  states  that  the  Dragon  is 
Satan.  But  tliis  vociferation,  is  no  argument  to  the 
effect  that  the  prophet  means  that  the  Dragon  is 
Satan.  It  is  a  mere  begging  of  the  question.  In  an 
ordinary  document,  such  an  ex})licit  statement  would 
be  sufficient  evidence  of  the  meaning,  but  in  an  alle- 
goric and  sj'mbolic  work,  the  language,  plain  though 
it  be,  looks  the  other  way.  The  very  fact  tliat 
the  prophet  gives  us  to  understand  ])lainly  that  the 


270  THE  sy:mbol  sat  an. 

Dragon  is  Satan,  and  that  Satan  is  the  arch  enemy 
of  mankind,  is  the  strongest  proof  which  he  could 
give  tliat  the  Dragon  is  not  Satan,  tlie  arcli  enemy, 
since  he  writes  an  allegory,  the  fundamental  prin- 
ciple of  wliich  is  to  sj)eah  otherwise.  It  is  indeed 
difficult  for  the  reader  to  get  rid  of  tlie  plain  and 
obvious  sense  of  language  in  the  perusal  of  a  work  ot 
this  description,  and  it  requires  wisdom  to  be  con- 
tinually on  the  watch  for  the  hidden  sense,  which  is 
really  meant.  The  principle  of  the  language  in  which 
the  prophet  writes,  is  to  invert  the  common  and 
ordinary  sense  of  words,  and  appl}^  to  them  significa- 
tions wliich  are  quite  different.  It  requires  pains  to 
follow  him  in  this  process  of  inversion,  but  it  must  be 
done  if  we  would  understand  him.  Had  the  prophet 
not  used  the  terms  Satan,  the  devil,  the  deceiver,  tlie 
serpent,  at  all,  we  should  then  have  had  ground  to 
say,  that  Satan  the  spirit,  might  have  been  meant. 
Having  used  them,  the  really  legitimate  inference  is, 
that  Satan  is  not  designed.  Those  who  urge  that  the 
pro2)liet  plainly  states  the  Dragon  to*  be  Satan  the 
spirit,  forget  the  character  of  the  w^riting.  This 
requires  us  to  draw  from  a  direct  statement  an  op- 
posite conclusion  from  that  which  is  valid  in  common 
discourse.  Here  we  are  to  assume  the  plain  sense  of 
language  and  prove,  if  necessary,  an  occult  meaning. 
In  allegoric  composition,  the  opposite  principle  pre- 
vails. We  are  here  under  obligation  to  assume  the 
hidden  sense,  and  if  necessary  to  prove  the  literal. 
This  principle  must  be  carried  out  with  the  whole  book 
of  Eevelation,  all  of  which  must  be  understood  to  be 


THE   SYMBOL    SATAN.  271 

symbolic,  except  that  which  is  proved  incapaLle  of 
yielding  a  symbolic  sense,  and  which,  therefore,  must 
be  literal.  But  it  has  not  been  proved  that  a  symbolic 
sense  does  not  properly  here  lie.  It  has  been  assumed, 
on  the  contrary,  on  the  ground  simply  of  the  plainness 
of  the  language,  that  Satan  is  designed.  The  contrary 
conclusion  is  evidently  the  legitimate  one.  The  more 
plainly  that  the  idea  of  Satan  the  spirit  is  developed, 
the  more  we  are  to  believe  that  Satan  is  not  meant, 
and  the  more  we  ought  to  be  animated  to  search  for 
the  hidden  and  occult  meaning,  which,  according  to 
the  law  of  the  book,  lies  concealed  under  the  plain  and 
obvious  language.  In  this  search  the  prophet  helps 
us  by  connecting  the  symbol  Satan  with  that  of  the 
Dragon,  which  he  had  previously  described.  This, 
there  is  ground  to  believe,  and  not  Satan,  is  really  the 
explanatory  and  interpretory  symbol,  and  of  the  seven 
Leads  and  ten  horns  of  it  there  is  a  formal  interpre- 
tation rendered  in  ch.  xvii.  From  this  interpreta- 
tion, we  deduce  that  a  great  political  empire  is  pre- 
figured by  the  Dragon  and  Satan,  and  that  these  are 
strictly  synonymous  symbols.  There  is  accordingly 
much  better  reason  for  saying,  that  the  Dragon  is  the 
interpretation  of  Satan,  than  that  Satan  explains  the 
Dragon,  since  of  the  seven  heads  and  ten  horns  we 
have  an  unquestionable  interpretation.  This  inter- 
pretation, wliich  is  certain,  entirely  conflicts  with  the 
idea  that  Satan  is  an  inter2)retation. 

Tlie  principle  is  to  be  held  steadily  in  view 
throughout  the  interpretation  of  the  book  that  the 
symbolic  prophet  has  really  divested  himself  of  the 


272  THE   SYMBOL    SATAN. 

power  of  speaking  plainly.  He  lias  given  his  readers 
to  understand  he  does  not  s])eak  plainly.  How  then 
can  he  ever  speak  plainly  ?  It  is  sheerly  impossible 
that  he  ever  can,  and  just  in  proportion  to  the  plain- 
ness of  his  speech,  are  we  hound,  on  his  own  prin- 
ciples, to  look  for  a  hidden  meaning.  The  only  occa- 
sion upon  which  this  law  can  be  held  suspended,  is 
when  he  renders  a  formal  interpretation  of  his  lan- 
guage in  such  a  manner  as  to  show  that  he  has  laid 
aside  his  disguised  mode  of  speaking,  and  has  adopted 
that  which  is  common  and  usual ;  but  even  liere  it 
it  has  been  shown  he  preserves  a  certain  mystical  air 
in  keeping  with  the  general  style  of  his  work,  and 
even  interpretations  must  be  scrutinized.  But  in  the 
general  current  of  his  work,  and  where  he  gives  no  in- 
timation that  he  ceases  to  speak  allegorically,  he  must 
be  held  to  write  in  a  purely  symbolic  style  ;  if  lie  did 
not  do  so,  he  would  neccssarilv  be  unintelbVible.     If 

I  u  CD 

he  wrote  now  symbolically  and  now  literally,  lie  would 
violate  the  contract  he  has  made  with  his  readers,  and 
would  require  himself  to  be  present  to  explain  his 
work,  and  tell  us  what  he  means  to  be  literal  and  what 
symbolic.  Accordingly,  by  no  plainness  of  speech 
whatever,  can  the  symbolic  prophet  ever  convince  his 
readers  that  he  is  speaking  plainly,  nor  is  there  the 
slightest  evidence  that  any  symbolic  prophet  of  Scrip- 
ture attempts  to  do  this.  He  leaves  the  explanation 
of  his  meaning,  not  to  ideas  of  plain  speaking,  but  to 
those  laws  of  s}' mbolic  writing  which  evolve  and  dem- 
onstrate the  hidden  meaning.  When  John,  therefore, 
asserts  Satan  to  be  the  old  serpent,  called  the  Devil, 


THE   SYIMBOL    SATAN.  273 

the  accuser  of  the  brethren  and  the  deceived',  and 
describes  the  arch  enemy  of  man  in  language,  the 
plainness  of  which  cannot  be  mistaken,  he  is  only 
assuring  us  with  the  greater  emphasis,  that  he  means 
something  diflerent  from  Satan.  For  what  reason? 
For  the  reason  that  he  writes  an  allegory,  and  he  has 
pledged  himself  to  sjyeak  otherwise. 

It  is  a  fundamental  law  of  that  kind  of  composi- 
tion in  which  the  prophet  delivers  his  prophecy  and 
upon  which  its  intelligibility  is  based,  that  every  word 
is  to  be  received  as  a  symbol  from  which  a  right  and 
proper  symbolic  sense  can  be  in  harmony  with  the 
laws  of  the  language  and  the  sense  developed  educed. 
This  last  condition  is  a  proviso  which  extends  to  every 
writing,  for  that  can  never  be  held  to  be  meaning 
which  yields  no  sense.  Accordingly,  if  a  word  taken 
symbolically  makes  nonsense,  it  is  clear  it  is  not  a 
symbol.  This  is  a  test,  the  application  of  which  is 
simple,  and  it  is  an  efficient  one.  In  the  prophecy 
there  is  a  vast  number  of  words  which  are  to  be 
taken  in  their  literal  signification.  Such  are  those 
which  are  required  in  the  machinery  of  the  allegory 
for  setting  it  up  and  for  the  disposal  of  its  parts,  for 
attaching  the  symbols  and  describing  the  relations 
which  they  bear  one  to  another,  and  also  for  explain- 
ing, in  several  instances,  the  second  sense.  But  tlie 
principle  upon  which  the  separation  of  these  words 
from  the  true  symbolic  signs  of  the  prophecy  is  to  be 
made,  is  clear  and  well-defined.  It  is  this.  Every 
word  is  to  be  held  symbolic  until  it  refuses,  upon  a 
rigorous  categorical  interrogation,  to  give  an  intelli- 
12* 


274  THE    SYMBOL    SATAN. 

giblo  sense  as  such.  Then,  bul  not  till  then,  is  the 
word  to  be  rejected  as  a  symbol,  and  then,  but  clear- 
ly not  till  then,  is  it  to  be  placed  to  the  account  of 
literal  phraseology. 

The  plainness  of  the  language,  then,  and  the  ob- 
viousness of  its  sense  afford  not  the  slightest  argu- 
ment that  an  interpretation  is  here  designed.  But  this 
is  the  sole  argument  which  is,  or  which  it  is  possible 
to  advance,  that  the  w^ords  in  question  convey  an  in- 
terpretation, and  it  is  baseless.  Accordingly,  that  an 
interpretation  is  here  designed  is  a  sheer  assumption. 
It  is  an  assumption  characterized  by  its  audacity,  for, 
on  the  ground  of  obviousness^  it  would  set  up  the 
sense  in  a  book  wdiicli  is  mystical.  It  is  mischievous, 
for  it  threatens  to  stab  the  language  and  the  allegory 
at  once. 

But  let  us  now  turn  to  the  evidence  wdiich  estab- 
lishes the  proposition  that  this  is  not  an  interpretation. 
It  has  been  seen  that  there  is  nothing  to  prove  it  such ; 
accordingly^  for  want  of  this  evidence  it  falls  to  the 
ground  as  an  interpretation ;  there  are,  however, 
strong  reasons  for  concluding  that  it  constitutes 
part  of  the  symbolic  text  of  the  prophet.  There  is 
no  formula  of  interpretation  here  employed :  no 
angel-interpreter  speaks  :  there  is  nothing  in  the  lan- 
guage to  indicate  that  the  prophet  has  changed  his 
enigmatical  style  and  that  he  is  using  the  words  of 
plain  speech:  it  necessarily  follows  he  is  still  to  be 
held  as  speaking  enigmatically.  The  construction  of 
his  sentence  imports  likewise  that  he  is  engaged  in 
making  a  transition  from  one  symbol  to  another  that 


THE    SYMBOL    SATAN.  275 

is  perfectly  synonymous;  lie  intimates  that  lie  is 
doing  this,  not  by  saying  that  the  Dragon  is  Satan, 
for  then  we  might  suppose  an  interpretation;  but  by 
coupling  the  names  together  in  one  set  of  what  is  really 
nothing  more  nor  less  than  so  many  aliases  !  "  And 
the  Great  Dragon,"  he  says,  "was  cast  out!"  alias 
"the  old  serpent,"  alias  "the  Devil,"  alias  "Sa- 
tan." Such  is  the  legitimate  construction  to  be  put 
upon  his  language.  Passing  from  the  Dragon  to  the 
correspondent  symbol,  Satan,  his  synonyme,  he  ne- 
cessarily uses  language  in  consistency  wnth  the  new 
symbol  which  he  has  adopted,  such  as  "  deceiving 
the  whole  world  "  and  "  deceiving  the  nations ; "  but 
such  phraseology  can  be  no  more  held  to  imply  Satan 
than  the  name  itself.  The  most  conclusive  argu- 
ments, however,  that  no  interpretation  is  meant  by 
the  words  in  question,  are  to  be  derived 

\st.  From  the  extreme  plainness  of  the  w^ords 
themselves. 

^d.  From  their  peculiar  position  ;  and 

3rl  From  their  frequent  repetition. 

In  regard  to  the  first  of  these  elements  in  the  lan- 
guage, we  observe  that  when  an  interpretation  is 
really  rendered,  it  is  never  fully  rendered  ;  there  still 
remains  something  to  be  discovered.  This  element 
of  partial  secrecy  adheres  more  or  less  to  all  the  in- 
terpretations of  symbolic  Scripture.  Daniel  gives  an 
intepretation  of  the  prophecy  of  the  four  beasts,  in 
ch.  vii.,  but  he  leaves  us  to  infer  what  empires  they 
prefigure,  and  he  leaves  us  to  infer  that  the  first  three 
do  not  stand  for  kings,  as  he  states  them  to  be,  but 


276  THE   SYMBOL   SATAN. 

kingdoms  or  empires.  The  interpretation  wliicli  he 
renders  in  chap.  viii.  is  distinguished  by  nnusnal  plain- 
ness of  speech  ;  but  even  here  the  language  is  not  all 
to  be  taken  in  its  strictly  literal  sense.  John  him- 
self, certainly,  preserves  a  mystical  air  in  his  interpre- 
tation in  ch.  xvii.,  although  his  meaning  is  sufficiently 
intelligible  at  first  sight.  But  yet  he  does  not  express- 
ly^ name  the  Roman  power,  as  he  is  supposed  to  name 
Satan  here ;  nor  are  the  seven  and  the  ten  kings  of 
which  he  speaks,  and  which  he  likewise  does  not 
name,  to  be  taken  in  the  strictly  literal  sense.  Yet 
tliis  is  a  distinct  and  formal  interpretation,  delivered 
by  the  angel,  and  there  is  something  in  it  still  to 
discover.  But  Satan  is  all  too  plainly  spoken  of  in 
the  passage  in  question,  to  be  regarded  as  interpre- 
tatory,  for  there  is  absolutely  nothing  left  to  discover. 
The  prophet  strives  to  make  the  idea  of  Satan  as  plain 
and  obvious  as  language  can  possibly  make  it,  which 
is  evidence  that  he  is  still  speaking  enigmatically,  for 
were  he  speaking  as  he  really  means,  he  would  still 
speak  somewhat  darkly. 

Secondly,  the  rule  in  regard  to  an  interpretation, 
is  to  render  it  at  the  end  of  the  discourse ;  but  this 
rule  is  here  infringed.  John  sets  out  with  the  men- 
tion of  Satan  almost  at  the  outset.  He  hastens  with  a 
zeal  and  promptitude  in  the  highest  degree  sus23icious, 
to  tell  the  meaning  of  his  symbol.  In  doing  this  he 
acts  in  a  manner  diametrically  opposed  to  the  usual 
practice  and  to  the  fundamental  principle  of  symbolic 
writings  which  is  to  exercise  the  understanding  of  the 
reader  in  the  discovery  of  the  sense.     With  this  view 


THE    SYMBOL    SATAN.  277 

even  interpretations  are  merely  suggestive,  while 
they  are  invariably  rendered  at  the  end  of  the  dis- 
course. The  position  then  of  the  passage  is  adverse 
to  its  interpretatory  character. 

But  thirdly,  in  no  case  is  an  interpretation  ren- 
dered more  than  once  ;  this  is  justly  regarded  as  suf- 
ficient. But  John  delivers  this  interpretation  several 
times  in  ch.  xii.  He  has  occasion  to  mention  the 
Drao-on  asrain  in  ch.  xx.,  and  he  hastens  to  tell  us  that 
he  means  by  it  "  that  old  serpent,  which  is  the  Devil 
and  Satan,"  information  which  he  had  already  several 
times  repeated ;  and  lest  we  should  not  be  sure  of  it 
even  yet,  he  repeats  it  several  times  more.  Kow 
why  this  enthusiasm  of  interpretation  in  this  single 
instance,  when  the  prophet  is  everywhere  else  so  ex- 
tremely reserved  and  chary  in  the  dispensation  of 
light  ?  In  the  whole  book  he  draws  upon  the  intelli- 
gence of  his  reader,  to  which  he  makes  a  frequent 
appeal,  advising  him  of  the  fact,  that  wisdom  is  neces- 
sary to  discover  his  real  meaning,  and  that  he  is  not 
to  understand  him  in  the  plain  and  obvious  sense  of 
lan2"uaa-e,  and  the  effect  of  this  admonition  extends 
even  to  an  express  interpretation.  But  all  at  once 
the  prophet  lays  aside  every  shred  of  his  allegoric 
dress,  for  what  reason  it  is  impossible  to  see,  and 
assumes,  not  an  ingenuity,  as  he  is  wont  to  do,  but  a 
gross  stupidity  on  tlie  part  of  his  readers,  a  stupidity 
so  gross,  that  he  requires  to  tell  them  the  same  thing 
in  plain  language,  in  language  so  plain,  that  a  child 
cannot  mistake  it,  over  and  over  again.  The  pro- 
cedure of  John  is  so  unaccountable  and  anomalous, 


278  THE    SYMBOL    SATAN. 

if  this  be  an  interpretation,  that  on  this  ground  alone 
we  must  reject  the  very  idea  of  its  being  such,  and 
hold  that  the  prophet,  when  he  is  speaking  of  Satan, 
is  still  speaking  in  enigma.  It  is  only  thus  that  the 
prophecy  can  be  delivered  from  that  which  must  be 
regarded  as  a  blemish  of  the  first  magnitude  in  an 
enigmatical  work,  a  garrulousiiess  of  interpretation. 

These  are  strong,  possibly  unanswerable  argu- 
ments, against  the  regarding  this  passage  in  the  light 
of  an  interpretation.  But  let  us  apply  to  it  as  we 
ought  to  do,  and  as  we  must  do  the  fundamental  law 
of  the  book  above  referred  to,  the  law,  namely,  that 
every  thing  is  to  be  regarded  as  symbol  wliich  will 
bear  a  right  symbolic  sense.  This  is  plainly  a  law  as 
fundamental  to  the  interpretation  of  this  book,  as  the 
law  is  to  that  of  language  generally,  that  every  thing 
is  to  be  taken  literally  which  will  bear  a  literal 
acceptation.  Now  it  w^ill  be  found,  that  applying 
this  law,  a  sense  arises  for  Satan,  which  is  thus  a 
symbol,  in  eminent  harmony  vrith  the  whole  tenor  of 
the  composition,  as  well  as  with  the  spirit  of  ScrijD- 
tural  symbolic  writing  generally,  and  a  sense  wliich 
redeems  the  interpretation  from  all  that  irrationality 
which  attaches  to  it,  if  Satan  the  spirit  is  understood. 
This  sense  is  to  accept  Satan  as  a  synonymous  symbol 
with  the  Dragon.  By  Michael  the  kingdom  of  God 
is  unquestionably  signified,  for  it  is  not  the  Son  of 
Man  personally  who  is  here  meant,  as  must  be  con- 
fessed by  every  one,  and  nothing  else  but  this  king- 
dom can  be  prefigured  by  his  name.  Michael,  he 
who  is  like  to  God,  is  used  then  as  a  symbol  of  the 


THE   SYMBOL    SATAN.  279 

kingdom  of  God.  Satan,  on  tlie  other  hand,  the 
enemy  of  God,  is  used  to  designate  the  enemy  of  his 
kingdom.  What  more  natural  and  more  proper, 
than  that  Satan,  the  arch  enemy  of  God,  should  be 
taken  to  represent  the  main  and  principal  form  of  that 
dominion,  the  Eoman,  which,  according  to  symbolical 
prophecy,  is  the  arcli  enemy  of  His  kingdom,  in  a 
book,  part  of  which  is  certainly  known  to  be  political 
in  its  texture,  and  the  whole  of  which  must,  on  the 
ground  of  that  unity  of  design  which  is  essential  to  it, 
be  held  to  be  such.  What,  on  the  other  hand,  more 
improper  than  that  Michael  should  be  a  symbol  and 
Satan  should  not ;  that  the  heaven  from  which  Michael 
casts  Satan  should  be  symbolical,  and  Satan  himself 
should  not.  We  see  in  the  application  of  this  sym- 
bol to  the  great  political  enemy  of  the  kingdom  of 
God,  the  Eoman  dominion,  and  to  the  last,  for  the 
Dragon  or  Satan  is  the  last  that  is  destroyed,  an  indi- 
cation of  that  unity  of  design  and  conception  which 
pervades  the  whole  word  of  God.  This  consideration 
itself  will  afford  an  argument  to  fix  the  sense  of  the 
symbol.-  The  first  prediction  that  was  delivered,  is  to 
the  effect,  that  the  seed  of  the  woman  shall  bruise 
the  serpent's  head.  Gen.  iii.  15  ;  the  last  that  closes 
the  whole  volume  of  inspiration,  is  the  destruction  of 
the  serpent  as  the  symbol  of  the  Eoman  dominion, 
when  the  victory  of  the  Son  of  Man  is  complete,  and 
when,  in  the  words  of  Daniel,  "  there  is  given  him 
dominion,  glory,  and  a  kingdom,  that  all  people, 
nations,  and  languages  should  serve  him  :  his  domin- 
ion is  an  everlasting  dominion,  which  shall  not  pass 


280  THE    SYIVIBOL    SATAN. 

away,  and  his  kingdom  that  which  shall  not  be 
destroyed,"  cli.  vii.  14.  This  is  unquestionably  the 
end  at  least  of  symbolic  prophecy.  Of  what  victory  is 
this  that  Daniel  speaks  ?  Is  it  not  of  the  victory  of  the 
Son  of  Man  over  the  fourth  great  world-dominion, 
which  is  the  Koman  ?  And  is  not  the  same  victory 
the  burden  of  the  Revelation  ?  Few  will  deny  this. 
The  whole  book  bears  evidence  that  it  is.  What 
more  natural,  then,  and  more  fitting,  than  that  John 
should  symbolize  a  step  towards  the  achievement  of 
it  by  a  victory  of  Michael  over  Satan,  ch.  xii.,  and 
the  consummation  of  it  by  the  casting  of  Satan  into 
the  lake  of  fire,  ch.  xx.  There  is  the  strongest 
evidence  that  the  prophecy  of  Daniel,  so  far  as  it 
respects  the  fourth  world-dominion,  is  identical  with 
that  of  John.  If  tlie  former  prophet  makes  no  refer- 
ence to  Satan  the  spirit,  on  what  ground  is  it  to  be 
held  that  Jolm  introduces  into  l)is  prophecy  a  sub- 
ject so  foreign  to  that  of  Daniel,  and  to  every  other 
part  of  his  own  ?  ^ay,  liow  can  he  prophesy  of  Satan 
tlie  spirit  and  deliver  an  intelligible  prophecy  at  all  ? 
But  it  is  a  law  with  liim,  Avhich  he  rigidly  adheres  to, 
simply  to  develop  and  to  originate  neitlier  a  new  sub- 
ject nor  a  new  image,  of  which  the  germ  at  least  is 
not  to  be  found  in  the  preceding  prophets.  He  de- 
velops, but  he  originates  nothing,  so  far  as  is  known, 
neither  in  style  nor  in  subject.  Where  is  the  germ 
of  Satan  the  spirit  in  the  elder  prophecies  ?  They  all 
bear  reference  to  the  political  world,  as  their  interpre- 
tations prove.  These  prophets  neither  do,  nor  could 
they  predict  of  Satan  the  spirit,  for  by  introducing  an 


THE    SYMBOL   SATAN.  281 

element  so  foreign  to  their  subject,  tlley^YOllld  destroy 
the  language  in  which  they  write,  and  make  tlieir 
compositions  incomprehensible.  Who  can  tell  where 
Satan  manifests  himself,  and  where  he  does"  not? 
How  can  his  presence  be  avouched  by  a  hieroglyphic 
symbol  ?  Of  great  political  dominions  and  events  in 
the  world's  liistory,  these  signs  can  give  an  intelli- 
gible account.  But  how  can  they  register  the  doings 
of  such  a  spirit  as  Satan?  The  subject  is  as  totally 
ignored  as  it  is  alien  to  their  whole  cast  of  imagery 
and  conception. 

Plow  stands  the  argument,  then  ?  it  stands,  thus 
far,  in  tliis  way  : 

16-^^.  There  is  not  a  particle  of  evidence  that  Satan 
is  an  interpretation  of  the  Dragon  ;  it  necessarily  fol- 
lows that  the  language  is  part  of  the  symbolic  text, 
and  accordingly  is  to  be  accepted  as  enigmatical. 

2(1.  There  are  irrefragable  arguments  which  prove 
that  Satan  is  not  an  interpretation  of  the  Dragon. 

M.  There  is  evidence  derived  from  the  language 
and  the  representation  made  that  Satan  is  asynonyme 
of  the  Dragon.  The  manner  in  which  the  prophet 
uses  either  designation  throughout  his  prophecy,  em- 
ploying them  interchangeably,  which  he  does,  is  in 
harmony  with  this  latter  conclusion,  and  of  itself  al- 
most necessitates  it. 

These  arguments  show,  that  whatever  be    meant, 
Satan  is  not  meant. 

But  let  us  now  proceed  to  prove  that  the  true  in- 
terpretation of  the  symbol  is  tlie  Koman  Empire, 
independently  of  any  amalgamation  of  it  with  its 
Bynonyme,  the  Dragon.     This  will  be  important;  it 


282  THE    SYMBOL    SATAN. 

will  fix  the  sense  of  Satan,  independently  of  the 
Dragon,  and  it  will  likewise  confirm  the  application 
which  is  made  of  the  Dragon. 

In  one  of  tlie  Old  Testament  prophecies,  models 
for  the  Revelation,  Satan  is  employed  as  a  symbol 
for  a  political  enemy  of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  the 
times  therein  referred  to.  There  is  an  exhibition 
of  unity  of  design  in  the  spirit  of  God's  eniploying 
the  symbol  in  tlie  same  sense  in  John,  which  atibrds 
a  sound  basis  for  argumentation.  It  is  well  known 
that  John  founds  on  past  events  in  the  history  of  the 
church,  as  types  of  the  times  of  which  he  speaks. 
The  imagery  of  the  vials  is  drawn  to  a  great  extent 
from  the  plagues  of  Egypt,  tlie  delivery  of  the  church 
from  Egyptian  bondage,  being  typical  of  that  deliver- 
ance of  the  church  from  Koman  thraldom,  which  the 
seven  last  plagues  or  vials  efi'ect.  The  Seven  Trum- 
pets are  founded  upon  the  siege  of  Jericho  by  Joshua, 
the  trumpets  on  this  occasion  being  blown  seven  days 
successively,  until  the  hostile  city  fell.  The  fall  of 
Jericho  is  typical  of  the  fall  of  the  last  great  enemy 
of  the  church,  which  the  seven  trumpets  of  the  Heve- 
lation,  symbolical  of  seven  great  judgments,  efi'ect.  The 
deliv^erance  of  the  Jews  from  Babylonish  captivity, 
and  their  resurrection  to  a  state  of  national  existence 
in  Palestine,  are  predicted  by  Ezek.,  ch.  xxxvii.,  under 
the  figure  of  a  resurrection.  This  restoration  after- 
w^ards  came  to  pass.  It  is  assumed  by  John,  as  typi- 
cal of  the  great  resurrection  of  the  church  from 
Roman  captivity,  when  the  saints  of  the  Most  High 
take  the  kingdom,  as  predicted  by  Daniel  and  by 


THE    SYIkrBOL   SATAN.  283 

John,  and  one  of  the  representations  of  this  consum- 
mation made  by  John,  is  founded  on  the  figure  used 
by  Ezekiel,  Rev.  xx.  5.  Now  in  predicting  this 
restoration  of  the  Jews,  the  antitype  of  the  grand 
consummation  predicted  by  John,  the  prophet  Zecha- 
riah  emphiys  the  very  same  symbol  which  the 
prophet  of  the  Kevelation  here  makes  use  of,  viz., 
Satan.  Zechariah  represents  Joshua,  the  high  priest, 
standing  before  the  angel  of  the  Lord,  and  Satan 
standing  at  his  right  liand  to  resist  him,  ch.  iii.  Is 
Satan  literal  here?  Certainly  not,  for  Joshua  is  not 
literal.  Joshua  is  the  emblem  of  his  nation,  and 
Satan  is  unquestionably  the  symbol  of  the  Baby- 
lonish power  or  its  immediate  successor,  resisting  the 
return  of  the  Jews  to  Judea,  and  their  establishment 
there  as  an  independent  nation.  A  further  and  a 
spiritual  sense  has  been  attached  to  this  prediction  ; 
but  without  calling  this  in  question  here,  this  is 
its  primary  sense,  as  v.  2  and  the  strictly  analo- 
gous prophecy  in  ch.  i.,  the  import  of  which  cannot 
be  mistaken,  clearly  shows.  The  burden  of  these 
predictions  in  their  primary  significance,  is  the  revi- 
vification of  the  Jews  to  a  full  and  prosperous  state 
of  national  existence ;  and  that  this  is  their  primary 
meaning,  many  indications  of  the  second  sense  scat- 
tered throughout  them  sufficiently  prove.  Zechariah 
then  employs  Satan,  which  he  uses  as  a  symbol  to 
represent  the  Babylonish  dominion.  John  is  doing 
nothing  more  than  maintaining  his  principle  of  repre- 
sentation, to  which  throughout  the  book  he  is  true, 
of  selecting  his  imagery  from  the  preceding  prophets, 


284:  THE    SYMBOL    SATAN. 

and  of  applj^ing  it  in  a  striking,  analogous  manner, 
when  he  nses  Satan  to  symbolize  the  Roman  domin- 
ions, or  the  Koman  empire,  a  power  which  occnpies 
to  the  kingdom  of  God  in  the  distant  times  referred 
to  by  him,  the  same  relative  position  which  the 
Eabylonish  power  occupied  to  it  in  the  times  spoken 
of  by  Zechariah.  It  is  thus  obvious,  that  unity  of 
conception  throughout  the  works  of  tlie  authors  who 
wrote  in  it,  which  is  necessary  to  the  existence  of 
the  symbolic  language  as  a  vehicle  of  intelligible 
communication,  is  maintained  by  the  application  of 
Satan  in  the  Eevelation  to  the  Roman  dominion  ;  but 
it  is  violated  by  every  other  application  wliich  is 
made  of  the  symbol,  and  its  language  is  reduced  to 
a  state  of  paralysis.  If  the  one  prophet  of  God 
nses  the  symbol  to  designate  a  political  dominion, 
does  not  tlie  other  prophet  of  God  do  the  same  ? 
Conimon  sense  demands  tlie  conclusion  that  he  does, 
and  let  it  ever  be  remembered  that  common  sense  is 
an  excellent  exponent  of  the  sense  of  Scripture;  well- 
established  precedent  enforces  the  conclusion ;  the 
science  of  interpretation  corroborates  it,  for  if  John 
uses  his  signs  differently  from  Zechariah,  the  truth 
and  virtue  of  symbolic  representation  are  forever  lost. 
This  is  one  passage  which  may  justly  be  held  to 
^x  tlie  sense  of  the  sj^inbol.  The  conclusion  is  a 
legitimate,  nay,  a  necessary  one,  that  as  Zechariah 
employs  Satan  for  the  political  adversarj^  hindering 
the  restoi'ation,  John  emploj^s  it  for  the  political  ad- 
versary hindering  the  final  victory  of  God's  kingdom, 
of  which  the  restoration  was  a  type.     But  there  is 


THE   SYIVESOL   SATAN.  285 

another  passage  of  Zecliariah ;  and  another  for  this 
prophet  affords  three  authorities  to  fix  the  sense  of 
the  svinboL 

An  express  association  is  constructed  by  him 
connecting  Satan  with  the  political  enemy  of  the 
kingdom  of  God,  whicli  he  had  immediately  in 
view.  He  delivers  a  prediction  in  regard  to  the 
restoration  of  the  Jews  in  ch.  i.  The  horses,  of  which 
he  there  speaks,  v.  8,  that  stood  among  the  myrtle 
trees  that  were  in  the  bottom,  plainly  symbolize  the 
political  antagonist  of  the  Jews  that  hindered  their 
restoration.  That  they  represent  this  power  is  evi- 
dent from  the  words  of  the  interceding  angel,  in  vs. 
12  and  15,  where  he  describes  them  as  the  "  heathen 
that  helped  forward  the  affliction,"  and  from  a  com- 
parison of  ver.  11,  with  ver.  15.  Of  these  horses  bear- 
ing this  significancy,  it  is  said,  "  These  are  they  whom 
the  Lord  hath  sent  to  walk  to  and  fro  through  the 
earth ;"  and  again  they  said,  "  We  have  walked  to  and 
fro  through  tlie  earth,  and  behold  all  the  earth  sitteth 
still  and  is  at  rest,"  vs.  10,  11.  Xow  "  walking  to  and 
fro,"  is,  in  Scriptural  conception,  eminently  a  char- 
acteristic of  Satan,  as  is  evident  from  other  passages, 
but  more  particularly  from  that  in  Job,  where  Satan 
applies  it  to  himself,  in  the  words,  "  And  the  Lord 
said  unto  Satan,  Whence  comest  thou  ?  Then  Satan 
answered  the  Lord,  and  said,  From  going  to  and  fro 
in  the  earth,  and  from  walking  up  and  down  in  it," 
ch.  i.  7.  We  here  find  then  an  association  of  the 
characteristic  of  Satan,  to  wit,  'Svalking  to  and  fro," 
with  this  "  heathen  that  helped  forward  the  afflic- 


THE   SYMBOL   SATAN. 

tion,"  and  in  the  application  of  the  same  symbol  in 
John  to  the  great  dominions  that  helped  forward  the 
affliction  in  the  times  to  which  he  refers,  and  hin- 
dered the  glorions  result  of  which  the  restoration  of 
the  Jews  from  the  Babylonish  captivity  is  typical  ; 
we  see  another  manifestation  of  that  unity  of  design 
which  the  Spirit  of  God  manifests  in  the  use  of  that 
imagery  with  which  he  clothes  his  predictions,  and 
which  unity  of  design  is  the  chief  key  to  their 
meaning,  and  at  the  same  time  the  guarantee  of  it. 
Observing,  then,  this  association  of  Satan  with  the 
power  which  hindered  the  restoration  of  the  Jews  in 
the  times  spoken  of  by  Zechariah,  we  are  under  obli- 
gation to  apply  the  symbol  in  John  to  a  power  which 
occupies  a  similar  relation  to  the  kingdom  of  God  in 
the  times  to  which  he  refers,  which  power  we  know 
from  Daniel  to  be  the  fourth  dominion  of  the  world, 
the  Roman.  This  is  thus  evidence  from  another  part 
of  Scripture  for  the  true  interpretation  of  the  symbol. 
But,  in  a  third  j^rediction  delivered  b}^  the  same 
prophet,  we  find  the  association  above  referred  to 
connected  with  the  same  branch  of  the  Roman  do- 
minion, of  which  there  is  the  strongest  internal  evi- 
dence that  the  Dragon  or  Satan  of  the  Revelation  is 
the  symbol,  viz.,  the  Imperial.  Zechariah,  in  ch.  vi., 
redelivers  the  prophecy  of  Daniel  concerning  the  four 
world-dominions,  prefiguring  them  under  the  form  of 
Four  Chariots.  The  essential  oneness  of  these  predic- 
tions is  admitted  by  most  commentators,  and  cannot 
reasonably  be  denied.  In  respect  of  the  red  horses  of 
the  first  chariot  the  prophecy  observes  silence,  for  the 


THE   SYMBOL   SATAN.  2S7 

Babylonian  empire,  wliicli  was  the  first,  had  ah-eady 
passed  away.  It  had,  therefore,  ceased  to  he  a  sub- 
ject of  prediction.  Of  the  bhick  horses  of  tlie  second, 
and  the  wliite  horses  of  the  third,  the  prophet  says 
that  they  "go  forth  into  the  north  country,"  ver.  6. 
The  prophecy  being  a  symbolic  one,  we  are  bound  to 
take  these  words  symbolically,  provided  they  yield  a 
good  sense  as  such.  Now  they  do  this,  and  conse- 
quently we  are  required  to  understand  them  symboli- 
cally. The  north,  the  region  from  whence  blow  cold 
blustering  winds,  is  the  natural  and  Scriptural  em- 
blem of  judgment  (Is.  xvi.  31,  xli.  25  ;  Pro  v.  xxv.  23), 
while  the  south,  the  region  of  soft  balmy  winds,  is 
the  natural  and  Scriptural  emblem  of  prosperity. — 
Job  xxxvi.  IT ;  Ps.  cxxvi.  4.  The  horses  of  the  sec- 
ond and  third  chariot  are  said  to  go  forth  into  the 
north  country,  that  is,  the  dominions  which  they  pre- 
figure, go  forth  into  judgment.  The  second  world- 
empire,  the  Medo- Persian,  was  at  this  time  flourish- 
ing; the  third,  the  Greek,  flourished  after  it;  but 
both  these  dominions  were  speedily  brought  to  judg- 
ment, and  passed  away.  That  this  is  at  once  the 
sense  and  the  fulfilment  of  the  predictions,  is  evident 
from  the  commentary  which  appears  on  them  in  v.  8. 
It  is  there  said,  "  Behold  these  that  go  toward  the  north 
country  have  quieted  my  spirit  in  the  north  country  :" 
the  meaning  of  which  can  alone  be,  that  the  domin- 
ions which  have  passed  to  judgment  have  quieted 
the  judicial  spirit  of  the  Lord.  The  idea  is  a  common 
one  throughout  the  Scriptures,  that  the  Lord  is  ap- 
peased, and  his  Sj^irit  is  quieted  by  the  judgment  in- 


288  THE    SYMBOL    SATAN. 

ilicted  on  his  enemies.  The  world-empires  are  his  and 
his  kingdom's  enemies,  and  he  is  here  said  to  be  ap- 
peased by  the  judgment  of  the  second  and  third.  But 
it  is  with  the  fourth  chariot  and  its  horses  that  w^e  liave 
particularly  to  do,  this  being  the  symbol  which,  as  it 
stands  for  the  fourth  world-empire,  unquestionably 
has  a  close  connection  w^ith  the  subject  of  the  Keve- 
lation.  Now  Zechariah  divides  the  empire  prefigured 
by  tliis  chariot  into  two  branches,  which  branches  he 
symbolizes  by  the  two  sets  of  horses  in  the  chariot. 
This,  it  is  to  be  noted,  is  the  sole  chariot  which  con- 
tains such  a  division  in  respect  of  its  horses.  These 
liorses  move  off  in  diiferent  directions,  leaving  it  rather 
obscure  what  becomes  of  tlie  cliariot,  so  little  does 
prophetic  allegory  care  about  the  mere  vehicle.  ]^ev- 
ertheless,  there  are  commentators  who  are  vevy  solici- 
tous on  such  points  as  this,  and  who  are  not  satisfied 
nnless  they  know  every  thing,  and  can  make  an  allegory 
square  with  the  second  sense  to  a  hair's  breadth,  which 
is  impossible ;  and  wdiich  the  Spirit  of  God  himself 
does  not  do.  The  tw^o  sets  of  horses  necessarily  rep- 
resent two  great  divisions  of  the  Roman  dominion, 
inasmuch  as  they  form  a  division  of  the  fourth  chariot 
which  stands  for  the  Roman  dominion.  Such  a  two- 
fold division  is  a  very  marked  one  in  history.  This 
dominion  cannot,  with  an  approach  to  correctness, 
be  portrayed  except  as  twofold.  Its  history  manifests 
the  two  great  divisions  of  the  Empire  and  the  Papacy. 
The  former  of  these  has  existed  from  the  days  of  John 
up  till  1806,  when  it  was  formally  dissolved.  The 
latter  has  held  a  steady  sceptre  of  dominion  upon  the 


THE    SYMBOL   SATAN. 

Koman  earth  since  the  sixth  centuiy.  What  Zecha- 
riah  predicts,  then,  of  the  fourth  dominion  has  been 
fulfilled  :  the  Roman  dominion  exhibits  in  history  two 
grand  divisions,  which  can  alone  be  held  to  be  the 
two  mentioned.  Of  the  grisled  horses  the  prophet 
says,  that  they  go  forth  toward  the  south  country. 
The  south  country  is  the  emblem  of  prosperity,  the 
north  being  the  emblem  of  judgment.  What  then  is 
here  predicted,  is,  that  one  of  these  divisions  shall 
be  an  eminently  prosperous  dominion.  But  the  Pa- 
pacy has  been  such  a  dominion,  for  its  history  has  ex- 
hibited a  longer  and  a  more  unbroken  tract  of  pros- 
perity than  has  fallen  to  the  lot  of  any  political  power 
on  record.  Prosperity  has  been  a  historical  character- 
istic of  the  Papacy  in  the  highest  degree,  and  it  is 
that  applied  to  it  in  the  prophecy.  Is  there  any  do- 
minion, since  the  time  of  Zechariah,  which  can  vie 
with  it  in  the  possession  of  this  notable  characteristic ; 
certainly  there  is  none.  The  Papacy  is  par  excellence 
the  pros_perous  dominion  of  history.  It  is,  moreover, 
the  dominion  for  which  the  long  period  of  1260  yeai*s 
prosperity  and  dominancy  has  been  chalked  out  in 
Daniel  and  in  the  Pevelation,  and  this  may  be  con- 
ceived had  regard  to  in  this  prediction  likewise.  The 
characteristic  establishes  the  identity  of  the  dominion 
predicted  of  by  the  three  prophets.  The  prediction 
regarding  the  grisled  horses  (the  color  of  which  may 
justly  be  held  to  indicate  a  many-peopled  dominion, 
(compare  Rev.  xiii.  7,  S,  and  xvii.  15-18,  and  the 
populousness  of  the  Papal  Empire)  is  then  fulfilled  in 
the  Papacy.  The  grisled  horses  standing  for  the 
13 


290  THE   SYMBOL   SATAN. 

Papal  division,  it  necessarily  follows  that  the  bay 
stand  for  the  Imperial,  since  this  is  the  only  other 
historical  division  of  that  dominion  for  which  the 
fourth  chariot  stands  and  which  exhibits  a  twofold 
division.  What  is  said  of  these  horses  is  worthy  of 
close  attention,  inasmuch  as  it  will  throw  an  impor- 
tant light  on  the  symbol  we  are  discussing.  It  is  said 
of  them,  "  And  the  bay  went  forth,  and  sought'  to 
go,  that  they  might  walk  to  and  fro  through  the 
earth  ;  and  he  said,  get  you  hence,  walk  to  and  fro 
through  the  earth.  So  they  walked  to  and  fro 
through  the  earth,"  v.  T.  Now  there  is  here  an  asso- 
ciation three  times  (developed,  doubtlessly  for  the 
sake  of  emphasis,  with  Satan,  whose  characteristic, 
as  it  has  been  seen,  is  to  "  walk  to  and  fro  "  through 
the  earth.  The  characteristic  of  Satan  is  here  ap- 
plied— and  applied  in  a  very  marked  manner — to 
the  Eoman  Imperial  power.  Accordingly,  in  the  se- 
lection of  the  symbol  Satan  in  the  Kevelation,  it  is  a 
legitimate  conclusion,  that  regard  has  been  had  to  an 
association  already  established.  An  association  of 
Satan  with  the  Empire  is  made  in  Zechariah ;  it  is 
reasonable  to  conclude,  that  the  Satan  of  the  Eevela- 
tion  is  associated  with  the  same  Empire,  since  John 
must  be  held  to  predict  of  it. 

But  the  w^ords,  while  they  excite  an  association 
which  identifies  "  the  bay  horses  "  of  Zechariah  wdth 
the  "Satan  "  of  John,  convey  a  prediction ;  this  is  their 
main  purpose  and  design.  It  is  here  prophesied  that 
the  division  of  the  Roman  dominion,  symbolized  by 
"  the  bay  horses,"  should  be  distinguished  by  the 


THE  SYMBOL  SATAN.  291 

characteristic  of  walking  to  and  fro  through  the  earth  ; 
that  is,  should  be  a  dominion  characterized  in  history 
by  the  change  of  its  locality,  and  its  peculiarly  va- 
grant condition,  if  the  expression  may  be  allowed. 
It  will  be  difficult  to  establish  any  other  sense  for  tlie 
words  except  this.  Now  this  feature  of  vagrancy  or 
itineracy  is  to  be  found  developed  in  the  highest  de- 
gree in  the  history  of  the  Roman  Empire.  As  the 
Papacy  has  been  pre-eminently  the  jprosperoiis^  so 
it  has  been  peculiarly  the  vagrant  dominion  of  his- 
tory. Before  the  fall  of  the  Empire  in  Italy,  and 
its  subsequent  transfer  to  Germany,  the  Emperors 
manifested  a  frequent,  and  in  rulers  very  unusual, 
desire  to  change  the  seat  of  government.  Dio- 
cletian removed  it  to  l^icomedia,  and  Milan,  and  Con- 
stantine  to  Constantinople.*  During  the  existence 
of  the  Empire  in  Germany,  it  has  been  essentially 
an  ambulatory  or  itinerant  dominion,  walking  at  the 
death  of  each  Emperor  through  the  various  King- 
doms of  Europe,  canvassing  and  seeking  for  a  wearer 
of  its  crown,  while  the  exact  position  of  its  power  at 
an}^  given  time  has  been  a  problem  of  ver}^  difficult 
solution.  It  has  been  pre-eminently,  in  fact,  the  do- 
minion which  has  walked  to  and  fro  through  the  earth, 
and  so  very  strangely  developed  has  been  this  char- 

*  Livy  gives  an  eloquent  and  lively  speech  of  Camillus  in  op- 
position to  a  design  of  removing  the  seat  of  government  from 
Rome  to  Veil.  Julius  Caesar  was  reproached  with  the  intention 
of  removing  the  capital  from  Rome  to  Ilium  or  Alexandria.  The 
third  ode  of  the  third  book  of  Horace  was  composed,  it  has  been 
thought,  to  divert  Augustus  from  a  similar  design.     See  Gibbon. 


292  THE   SYMBOL   SATAN. 

acteristic  of  it,  that  it  could  bj  no  means  be  consid- 
ered over  emphatic  in  the  jDrophecy,  to  mark  it  by  a 
threefold  announcement.  In  the  words,  "  And  the 
bay  went  forth  and  sought  to  go,  that  they  might 
walk  to  and  fro  through  the  earth,"  reference,  it  may 
be  held,  is  made  to  the  disposition  of  the  Emperors 
to  change  the  locality  of  the  government.  The  sig- 
nal and  compulsory  change  of  locality,  which  took 
place  when  it  was  cast  out  of  Italy  and  thrown  upon 
Germany,  which,  in  the  opinion  of  many  judicious 
commentators,  is  the  event  predicted  in  the  symboli- 
cal casting  of  the  Dragon  or  Satan  out  of  heaven 
upon  the  earth,  as  described  in  the  vision  in  which 
the  passage,  directly  in  question,  occurs,  may  proper- 
ly be  considered  as  intimated  in  the  words,  "  Get  you 
hence,  walk  to  and  fro  through  the  earth."  These 
words  sound  very  like  the  announcement  of  the  fiat 
of  the  Almighty  driving  the  Empire  out  of  Italy, 
and  causing  it  to  assume  its  perambulatory  life  in 
Germany.  Indeed,  it  is  not  easy  to  see  to  what  other 
event  in  history,  and  to  what  other  dominion  the  pre- 
diction thus  delivered  is  applicable.  When  it  is  con- 
sidered, moreover,  that  we  are  authorized  upon  the 
strictest  and  soundest  rules  of  interpretation,  to  ap- 
ply no  less  than  three  predictions  to  this  event — the 
dethronement  of  the  Emperor  in  Italy,  viz.,  the  pre- 
diction delivered  in  the  fourth  trumpet.  Rev.  viii.  12, 
that  of  Rev.  xii.  9,  and  the  one  now  in  question,  there 
lies  here  strong  evidence  for  coming  to  the  conclusion 
that  the  event  in  which  three  separate  predictions 
find  a  realization,  in  harmony  with  the  various  con- 


THE   SYMBOL  SATAX.  293 

ditions  to  be  fulfilled  in  each,  is  tlie  event  predicted 
by  these  three  predictions,  and  also,  that  if  three 
predictions  can  be  shown  to  be  fulfilled  in  one  event, 
these  three  predictions  constitute  one  prophecy.  This 
great  revolution  cannot  be  regarded  an  event  unlike- 
ly to  be  three  times  predicted,  since  it  is  a  signal 
characteristic  of  Scriptural  prophecy  to  repeat  its 
2:)redictions.  The  fall  of  the  Empire  at  Rome,  and  its 
transfer  to  Germany,  is,  beyond  doubt,  the  greatest 
revolution  which  has  taken  place  in  the  history  of 
the  world,  since  the  Christian  era,  and  it  is  the  one 
which  has  been  attended  with  the  most  momentous 
consequences.  It  paved  the  way  for  the  rise  of  the 
Papacy,  a  power  which  has  exercised  greater  influ- 
ence upon  the  affairs  of  modern  Europe  than  any  other 
which  has  appeared  on  this  theatre.  It  enabled  a  Ger- 
man King  to  array  himself  in  the  cast-off"  Imperial 
vestments,  and  to  exercise  an  authority  over  vassal 
States  through  the  authority  of  the  Roman  name  and 
Empire.  It  called  forth  from  the  abyss  which  it 
made  in  the  centre  of  Europe,  the  two  great  powers, 
the  Pope  and  the  Emperor,  which  have  led  the  desti- 
nies of  the  modern  Roman  world.  In  a  word,  it  was 
the  event  which  broke  up  the  Roman  dominion,  the 
fourth  of  the  world,  into  that  twofold  form  in  which 
w^e  find  it  represented  in  Daniel,  in  Zechariah,  and  in 
John,  as  there  is  the  plainest  evidence,  and  as  it  has 
existed  in  history.  "We  make  no  reference  here  to 
the  prediction  of  Paul  concerning  the  same  great 
revolution,  because  it  is  couched  in  literal  language, 
2  Thess.  i.  3-12.     But  the  relation  of  the  Empire  as 


294:  THE    STI^IBOL    SATAK. 

the  power  that  letted  or  hindered  the  rise  of  the  sub- 
sequent Papacy  is  there  very  distinctly  brought  out, 
and  affords  evidence  to  confirm  the  application.  Nor 
do  we  refer  to  the  allusion  made  to  this  same  great 
event  in  Revelation,  by  John  himself,  ch.  xiii.  2, 
where  it  is  said  that  the  Beast,  which  can  alone  be 
interpreted  to  be  the  Papacy,  entered  into  "  the  pow- 
er, seat,  and  great  authority  "  of  the  Dragon,  which 
seat  must  be  inferred  to  be  the  vacated  Imperial  seat, 
for  it  was  into  this  that  the  Papacy  entered.  To  ap- 
ply this  passage  to  its  occupation  of  the  seat  at  Rome 
of  fallen  Paganism,  is  wholly  untenable.  There  is 
no  authority  for  the  application  of  a  symbolic  pro- 
phecy to  an  ism  of  any  kind :  if  there  were,  the  lan- 
guage could,  by  no  possibility,  sustain  the  load  of 
isms  that  might  be  put  upon  it  by  the  fancy  of  man, 
to  which  free  rein  is  thus  given.  The  field  chalked 
out  for  the  symbols  by  Scriptural  authority  (all  else 
is  fancy,  and  idle  conjecture),  is  that  of  very  great, 
nay,  the  very  greatest  of  all  political  dominions  and 
events  in  the  history  of  the  world.  This  is  a  limited 
sj)here;  the  objects  in  this  world,  upon  which  history 
j)ours  its  clear  and  steady  beams  are  well  defined ; 
and  the  hieroglyx3hics  can  master  it,  and  can  be  de- 
finite upon  it.  .But  isms  and  ities  et  hoc  genus  omne, 
are  legion  in  number,  unsubstantial  and  airy  in  form  ; 
they  are  but  Protean  ghosts,  and  the  hieroglyphics 
cannot  seize  them.  They  abstain  from  them,  and 
there  is  not  the  slightest  evidence  that  they  touch 
them.  Whenever  one  hears  an  ism  or  an  ity  pre- 
dicted of  in  the  Revelation,  he  may  be  certain  the 


THE   SYMBOL   SATAN.  295 

interpretation  is  false  ;  the  language  is  incompetent  to 
describe  such  a  thing.  Symbolic  prophecy  is  conse- 
crated (by  some  thought  desecrated)  to  the  political 
field  alone.  Within  this,  which,  if  we  take  the  in- 
terpretations of  Scripture  as  our  guide,  is  its  only 
sphere;  it  is  definite,  intelligible,  and  subject  to  laws 
which  determine  its  sense,  and  invest  its  announce- 
ments with  the  force  of  demonstration ;  pushed  be- 
yond this,  it  is  shadowy,  indefinite,  and  totally  unin- 
telligible. It  becomes,  then,  instead  of  the  oracle  of 
divine  truth,  the  m^re  toyish  trumpet-piece  of  com- 
mentators, the  sound  of  whose  blasts,  however,  are 
sometimes  wofully  loud,  as  in  "  The  Great  Tribula- 
tion," but  at  the  same  time  wofully  uncertain.  Un- 
questionably, if  Satan,  the  Spirit,  be  in  the  Kevela- 
tion,  a  very  shrill  blast  may  be  sent  forth  by  the 
trumpeter,  provided  he  can  play  well.  But  Satan 
is  not  there,  and  tlie  note  is  a  false  one.  All  the  va- 
riations performed  on  this  note  are  likewise  false, 
such  as  the  resurrection  of  the  martyrs  in  the  literal 
sense,  their  reign  with  Christ  for  a  thousand  literal 
years,  the  assault  of  Gog  and  Magog  when  this  period 
is  finished,  the  living  of  the  immortals  and  the  dying 
of  the  mortals  together  on  this  earth,  the  conflagra- 
tion of  the  world,  the  general  resurrection,  and  the 
final  judgment  of  all  men ;  none  of  which  subjects  are 
spoken  of  in  the  Revelation,  except  as  symbols  of 
something  different ;  these  are  themes,  baseless,  then, 
which,  employed  by  a  performer  endowed  with  strong 
lungs,  make  an  ear-splitting  and  awful  music,  but 
containing,   as   Paul    says,   no   "distinction   in    the 


296  THE   SYMBOL   SATAN. 

sounds ; "  it  is  not  certainly  known  wliat  is  so  tremen- 
dously "  piped." 

The  argument,  then,  that  Satan  the  Spirit  is  not 
meant  in  this  passage,  and  that  it  contains  nothing 
which  conflicts  with  the  interpretation  in  ch.  xvii., 
may  be  summed  up  in  the  following  terms : 

In  the  first  place,  the  sole  argument  which  is  or 
which  can  be  advanced  that  the  passage  conveys  an 
interpretation,  is  a  fallacy.  The  obvious  meaning, 
according  to  the  principle  on  wdiich  the  book  is 
written,  is  not  the  real  one ;  it  i«  the  hidden  and  oc- 
cult which  is  the  real  sense.  It  can  scarcely  be 
questioned  that  it  is  a  legitimate  deduction  from  this 
premise  which  itself  is  indisputable,  that  the  more 
obvious  a  meaning  is  the  more  certain,  it  is  that  it 
is  not  the  true  one,  except  in  the  case  of  an  interpreta- 
tion being  rendered,  which  is  here  the  matter  to  be 
proved.  There  is  not  any  symbol  in  the  book,  of 
which  it  can  be  said  -with  truth  that  the  real  meaning 
is  obvious.  The  prophecy  is  constructed  witli  such 
system,  that  there  is  no  real  meaning  in  it  wliich  is 
not  enigmatical.  On  what  ground,  then,  are  we  au- 
thorized to  take  the  obvious  meaning  in  the  case  of 
Satan  ?  It  is  in  vain  to  say  that  it  is  on  account  of 
its  extreme  obviousness,  for  this  is  only  an  enforce- 
ment of  the  reason  why  w^e  should  not  take  it.  In 
common  discourse,  it  is  a  sound  rule  that  the  more 
plainly  a  man  speaks  the  more  we  are  bound  to  believe 
him  in  the  plain  sense  of  his  words.  It  is  evidently 
an  equally  valid  rule,  that  in  enigmatical  discourse, 
the  more  plainly  he  speaks  the  less  we  are  bound  to 


THE   SYMBOL   SATAN.  29Y 

believe  liim  in  the  plain  sense.  Kow  John  parades 
Satan,  the  Spirit,  before  our  eyes  in  the  most  con- 
spicuous and  flaring  colors ;  this  is  the  very  strongest 
evidence  he  could  give  us  that  Satan  is  not  meant  by 
him. 

In  the  second  place,  while  there  is  not  a  particle 
of  proof  that  Satan  is  designed,  there  is  strong  evi- 
dence for  the  conclusion  that  he  is  not  designed,  and 
that  the  language  is  symbolical.  There  is  no  formula 
of  interpretation  employed  which  can  alone  suspend 
the  law  applicable  to  the  whole  book,  ancj  which 
bears  that  it  is  to  be  read  symbolically.  There  is 
nothing  whatever  to  show  that  the  prophet  is  not 
passing,  as  he  does  on  several  other  occasions,  from 
on  symbol  to  another  that  is  strictly  synonymous — 
from  the  Dragon  to  the  correspondent  one  of  Satan. 
There  is  nothing  to  indicate  that  he  has  ceased  to 
speak  allegorically.  The  mere  want  of  evidence  to 
this  efi'ect  is  evidence  in  favor  of  the  contrary  position 
that  he  continues  to  allegorize^  since  it  is  only  the 
presence  of  evidence  which  can  suspend  the  applica- 
tion of  the  law.  There  is  thus  a  total  want  of  evi- 
dence for  the  one  position  which  in  itself  is  evidence 
in  favor  of  the  other.  On  the  other  hand,  there  is 
positive  evidence  that  an  interpretation  is  not  de- 
signed, because  if  there  were,  there  is  such  a  plain- 
speaking  and  frequent  repetition,  as  to  render  the  in- 
terpretation an  anomaly  such  as  cannot  be  conceived 
to  exist. 

In  the  third  place,  if  Satan  is  meant,  the  proph- 
ecy exhibits  the  gross  inconsistency  in  represen- 
13* 


298  THE   SYLIBOL   SATAI^^. 

tation,  of  marking  a  political  dominion  with  the 
characteristic  of  seven  heads  and  ten  horns,  ch.  xvii., 
and  of  attaching  the  same  characteristic  to  a  spirit, 
ch.  xii.  This  is  such  a  total  reversal  of  all  the  prin- 
ciples of  hieroglyphic  writing,  that  on  this  ground 
alone  Satan  cannot  be  held  to  be  designed. 

In  the  fourth  place,  if  Satan  is  meant,  then  one  of 
the  principal  actors  in  the  book  is  generic,  itself 
sufficiently  inconceivable,  and  comprehends  other 
two  actors  under  it,  namely,  the  beast  and  the  whore, 
for  these  must  be  understood  to  act  under  the  in- 
fluence of  Satan.  Of  such  a  comprehension,  which 
if  Satan  is  the  Spirit  must  exist,  there  is  not  the 
slightest  trace  in  the  book.  The  Dragon,  the  Beast, 
and  the  Whore,  the  three  actors,  appear  of  perfectly 
equal  standing.  There  is  no  intimation  that  the 
Dragon  leads  the  two  latter  on,  or  that  he  holds  any 
pre-eminence  over  them,  such  as  that  which  Satan 
must  be  conceived  to  hold  relatively  to  two  political 
powers  acting  under  his  influence.  Such  a  relation- 
ship must  have  been  expressed  had  the  Dragon  been 
intended  to  represent  Satan  the  Spirit ;  and  the  non- 
development  of  it  is  evidence  to  the  contrary.  At 
the  same  time  the  relationships  actually  developed 
between  the  three  symbols,  are  precisely  such  as  are 
correspondent  with  the  application  of  them  to  the  Ro- 
man Empire,  Papacy,  and  the  Church.  It  is  plainly 
contrary  to  the  true  relation  of  things,  to  represent 
Satan  on  the  same  level  and  in  alliance  as  the  Dragon 
is  represented,  ch.  xvi.  13,  14,  with  two  political 
powers.     Again,  the  Dragon,  the  Beast  and  the  False 


THE   SYMBOL   SATAIN".  2^ 

prophet,  (or  the  AVhore,)  are  described  as  gathering 
their  forces  to  a  final  battle,  ch.  xvi.  14.  But  if  the 
Dragon  be  Satan,  the  Spirit,  the  representation  made 
is  inept,  for  the  Dragon  is  contradistinguished  from 
the  other  two,  and  yet  being  Satan,  he  necessarily 
comprehends  them  both.  The  representation  of  the 
prophet  is  thus  made  to  contain  the  absurdity  which 
woukl  lie  in  the  statement,  were  any  one  foolish 
enough  to  make  it,  "  Germany,  Austria,  and  Prussia 
levied  war  against  France,"  which  is  a  statement 
plainly  absurd.  The  interpreter  is  not  at  liberty 
to  attach  a  meaning  to  the  work  he  is  deciphering, 
which  makes  it  speak  a  language  that  is  inept  and 
ridiculous. 

In  the  fifth  place,  if  Satan  is  to  be  taken  literally 
and  the  Dragon  symbolically,  the  language  and  the 
allegory  in  which  the  prophecy  is  couched  are  at 
once  destroyed.  The  language  is  annihilated  by  the 
subversion  of  its  fundamental  law  that  it  is  symboli- 
cal ;  if  it  is  partly  literal  and  partly  symbolical,  it  is 
destroyed  as  a  vehicle  of  intelligible  communication, 
since  there  is  nothing  in  it  to  determine  w^iat  is 
literal  and  what  is  symbolic.  It  is  destroyed  in 
another  respect,  likewise  ;  for  a  foreign  element  a 
spiritual  one  is  introduced  in  it,  which  unfastens  it 
from  the  mooring  it  has  in  the  symbolic  language  of 
the  Old  Testament.  The  lexicon  which  it  has  is  thus 
committed  to  the  fiames,  and  the  book  of  universal 
nature  is  opened  up  to  expound  a  few  simple  hiero- 
glyphic signs,  which  thus  become  the  sport  of  imagi- 
nation, but  cease  to  exist  as  definite  and  intelligible 


300  THE    SYMBOL    SATAN. 

signs.  The  same  blow  inflicts  on  the  allegory's  unity 
a  fatal  stab,  so  that  the  life  of  the  prophecy  is  taken 
in  one  and  the  same  assault.  These  are  consequences 
so  disastrous  that  the  interpreter  is  no  more  at  liberty 
to  apply  an  interpretation  which  incurs  them,  than 
the  physician  is  licensed  to  administer  a  poison. 

Sixthly  and  lastly  ;  the  true  interpretation  of  the 
symbol  is  given  in  Scripture  itself,  which  applies  it 
to  the  Koman  Empire.  Two  predictions  of  Zechariah 
not  only  authorize  but  necessitate  the  application  of 
the  symbol  to  the  Roman  dominion  ;  a  third  points 
out  the  Imperial  to  be  that  division  of  it  with  which 
Satan  is  associated.  This  association  is  made  in  that 
very  language  in  wdiich  the  prophet  writes,  and  its 
authority,  accordingly,  in  fixing  the  sense  of  the  sym- 
bol, is  in  itself  sufficient,  while  in  the  absence  of 
every  other  it  is  absolute. 

There  is  thus  nothing  in  this  celebrated  passage 
which  has  been  made  the  war-cry  of  commentators 
for  ages  in  their  onslaught  on  the  sense  of  the  proph- 
ecy, to  conflict  with  the  interpretation  in  ch.  xvii. 
It  gives  no  key  whatever  to  the  sense  ;  it  expresses  a 
mystery ;  but  this  mystery  is  solved  in  another  part 
of  Scripture.  Instead  of  a  key,  this  passage  literally 
taken  is  a  firebrand,  which  is  more  consistently  in  the 
hand  of  the  enemy  than  the  ally.  It  is  in  truth  a 
firebrand  which,  when  applied  to  the  temple,  wraps 
it  in  a  desperate  cloud  of  smoke,  besmirches  its  pillars, 
and  conceals  its  proportions  from  view.  The  true 
key  is  to  be  found  in  Zechariah.  The  authority  hence 
derived,  attaches  to  this  symbol  of  the  prophecy  the 


THE   SY^IBOL   SATAN.  301 


same  strictly  political  sense  wliich  all  the  other  sym- 
bols in  it  bear.  This  authority  speaks  the  language 
of  the  angel  Avhich  is  the  language  of  truth.  Out  of 
Zechariah,  then,  there  breaks  forth  a  light  from  the 
divine  source  of  light,  in  the  radiance  of  which  the 
prophetic  temple  reveals  itself  in  the  proportions  of 
exquisite  symmetry,  of  magnificent  but  classical 
beauty.  It  contains  within  it  an  oracle  that  speaks 
forth  the  destiny  of  Man,  of  Empires,  and  of  Nations, 
but  not  of  Satan. 


co:n"clusiok 

THE  DOUBLE  ALLEGORY   IN   ITS   SECOND  AND  REAL  SENSE, 
OK  PLAN  AND  DESIGN  OF  THE  REVELATION. 

"We  understand,  or,  at  least,  we  believe  we  under- 
stand now  tlie  first  representation  which  the  Eevela- 
tion  makes.  It  is  a  very  essential  point.  This  first 
representation  contains  two  allegories  instead  of  one, 
or  two  versions  of  the  prophecy  instead  of  one,  as  it 
has  hitherto  been  holden  to  contain.  It  has  been  seen 
that  this  twofold  representation  is  a  law  of  symbolic 
prophecy,  which  law  we  are  bound  to  believe  the 
Kevelation  follows.  It  has  been  seen  farther  that 
when  it  is  applied  to  the  prophecy,  a  plan  arises  for 
it  which  is  at  once  extremely  simple  and  extremely 
beautiful — in  itself  evidence  of  the  double  version. 
It  has  been  seen  that  the  plan  of  the  prophet  is  to 
give  a  short  first  version  containing  a  synopsis  or 
table  of  contents  to  a  longer,  full,  and  complete  ver- 
sion. This  second  version  he  delivers  in  the  seventh 
or  perfect  seal ;  the  one  version  he,  or,  to  speak  more 
correctly,  the  S^Dirit  of  God,  divides  from  the  other 
by  "  a  silence  in  heaven  about  the  space  of  half  an 
hour  " — a  clear  and  palpable  expression  of  the  division, 
which  has  such  an  effect,  and  which  can  have  no  other. 


PLAN    AND  DESIGN.  303 

It  lias  been  seen,  moreover,  that  a  fourfold  represen- 
tation of  the  subject  is  a  law  of  symbolic  art.  This  law, 
as  well  as  that  of  reduplication,  is  clearly  followed  in 
the  Revelation.  There  are,  upon  an  analysis  of  its 
contents,  no  more  than  four  subjects  discoverable  in  it. 
These  comprehend  a  Conqueror  and  three  antagonists, 
whom  the  former  defeats  and  destroys  by  casting  into  a 
lake  of  fire.  These  combatants  are  simply  exhibited  to 
view  in  the  first  version  ;  they  are  here  placed  on  the 
canvas  comparatively  in  a  state  of  nou-action,  noth- 
ing more  tlian  their  features  and  general  character 
being  expressed.  The  detail  of  the  contest  is  afi'orded 
in  the  more  complete  and  perfect  second  version.  In 
the  first,  however,  this  subject  is  introduced  once  for 
all,  and  with  the  view  doubtless  of  expressing  the 
perfect  unity  of  it  by  a  solemn  invitation  addressed 
by  the  Living-creatures  to  the  prophet  to  "  come  and 
see  "  its  components  as  they  are  displayed  under  the 
first  four  seals.  The  reduplication  is  pointed  out  by 
"  a  silence  in  heaven  about  the  space  of  half  an  hour," 
ch.  viii.  1.,  a  measured  pause  and  suspension  of  the 
representations  made  to  John,  which,  in  such  a  com- 
position as  this,  must  have  some  meaning,  and  which 
can  have  no  other  except  that  of  dividing  the  proph- 
ecy, which  itself  is  one^  into  two  versions.  The  other 
important  feature,  that  of  the  quaternal  structure,  is 
pointed  out  by  the  corresponding  and  otherwise  inex- 
plicable peculiarity  in  the  structure  of  the  prophecy 
above  described,  the  invitation  addressed  by  tlie  Liv- 
ing-creatures to  the  prophet  to  "  come  and  see  "  four 
pictures.     This,  like  the  ''  silence,"  is  a  peculiar  fea- 


304  PLAN   AND   DESIGN. 

ture  in  the  cliaracter  of  tlie  representations  made, 
which,  in  this  allegorical  work,  must  bear  a  sense  ;  it 
is  impossible  to  assign  to  it  any  other  meaning  except 
that  these  pictures  thus  introduced  constitute  all  the 
subjects  of  the  prophecy.  The  one  feature  is  inex- 
plicable, except  by  reduplication,  and  it  points  it 
out ;  the  other  is  inexplicable,  except  by  the  quater- 
nal  structure,  and  it  likewise  points  it  out.  If  the 
quaternal  structure  of  the  prophecy  is  proved,  it  in- 
volves the  proof  of  the  reduplication  ;  if  the  redu- 
plication is  proved,  it  involves  the  quaternal  struc- 
ture. Each  feature,  however,  is  proved  by  itself,  and 
the  truth  of  each  rests  upon  an  independent  basis, 
while  the  proof  of  the  one  contributes  strength  to 
the  other.  These  features  are  laws  of  symbolic  com- 
position which  it  must  be  held  the  prophet  follows. 
His  following  them  is  not  only  a  condition,  the  fulfil- 
ment of  which  is  to  be  anticipated  ;  it  is  to  be  de- 
manded of  him.  We  are  authorized  to  say  if  he  does 
not,  that,  not  fulfilling  the  laws  of  his  art,  he  does  not 
write  intelligibly.  The  prophet  is  prompt  to  the  call, 
for  he  informs  us  that  he  has  written  reduplication 
and  the  quaternal  structure  in  shining  letters  over  his 
work.  He  has  drawn  a  division  right  across  his 
prophecy  so  flaring  that  the  eye  of  the  blind  might 
almost  see  it ;  he  has  indicated  the  quaternal  structure 
by  a  device  which  is  as  conspicuous  as  it  is  expres- 
sive. At  the  same  time  the  recognition  of  the  fulfil- 
ment of  these  laws  by  the  prophet  brings  out  a  unity 
of  design  for  his  whole  book  which  is  only  the  carry- 
ing out  of  the  first  and  fundamental  principle  of  sym- 


PLAN  AND  DESIGN.  305 

bolic  writing,  to  wit,  the  principle  of  unity  of  concep- 
tion. The  prophet,  then,  has  implemented  all  the 
laws  of  his  art  in  the  structure  of  his  performance. 
He  has  given  to  the  interpreter  the  pledge  that  he 
has  been  true  to  its  principles,  and  he  points  him  to 
these  laws  as  the  main  key  to  decipher  his  meaning. 
He  writes  so  that  we  can  both  trust  him  and  under- 
stand him.  The  application  of  these  laws  is  neces- 
sary to  understand  his  first  representation.  The  appre- 
hension of  this  is  an  indispensable  step  to  the  appre- 
hension of  the  second.  If  we  understand  this  first 
representation,  we  are  then,  but  not  till  then,  at 
liberty  to  proceed  to  the  interpretation  of  the  second 
and  real  sense  of  his  prophecy. 

The  means  of  interpretation,  which  we  have  de- 
veloped in  the  preceding  pages,  will  not  enable  us  to 
do  more  than  give  a  sketch  of  the  general  design  of 
that  second  representation  which  the  prophecy  re- 
flects from  its  first.  The  laws  of  the  symbolic  lan- 
guage, and  the  application  of  the  symbols  to  histori- 
cal events,  can  alone  determine  the  details  of  this 
second  representation,  l^evertheless  the  sketching 
of  the  general  outline  of  it  may  justly  be  held  to  be 
the  first  work  to  be  perform^ed  in  the  development  of 
the  second  sense.  It  is  as  necessary  for  the  inter- 
preter of  a  symbolic  prophecy  to  complete  this  sketch 
as  it  is  for  the  painter  to  draw  a  rough  outline  of  the 
picture  he  is  about  to  paint.  Without  a  sketch  of  the 
prophet's  design  in  his  hand  the  interpreter  can  no 
more  know  where  to  place  a  particular  symbol,  upon 
which  he  may  lay  his  hand,  than  the  architect  with- 


306  PLAN  Amy  design. 

out  the  plan  of  the  building  how  to  set  a  stone  in  the 
building  he  is  erecting. 

The  means  of  interpretation  already  discussed  are, 
however,  quite  sufficient  to  enable  us  to  give  this 
general  sketch  of  the  prophet's  x^lan  and  design, 
which  may  be  justly  considered  the  pioneer  of  the 
interpretation.  It  is  a  sketch  quite  as  necessary  for 
him  as  the  chart  is  to  the  navigator.  The  means  al- 
ready discussed  put  this  into  our  hands,  and  for  this 
end  to  employ  any  farther  means  of  interpretation 
would  only  overload  the  plan.  The  generals  must  be 
carefully  ascertained  ere  the  particulars  be  conde- 
scended upon.  If  this  outline  be  truly  sketched,  if 
the  interpreter's  plan  and  design  be  a  faithful  reflex 
of  the  prophet's  plan  and  design,  the  filling  in  of  the 
details  into  this  j)lan  will  be  afterwards  a  matter  of 
comparative  facility,  and  it  may  be  added,  of  cer- 
tainty. The  knowledge  of  the  prophet's  plan  and 
design  is  indeed  the  fortress  of  the  whole  interj^reta- 
tion.  In  possession  of  this,  the  position  of  the  inter- 
preter may  truly  be  held  impregnable.  He  has  at 
his  command  an  artillery  of  demonstration  sufficient 
to  sweep  before  it  every  assailant. 

But  the  means  of  interpretation  already  considered 
are  sufficient  to  afford  this  plan  ;  they  develop  it  fully. 
The  application  of  the  two  in  reserve,  powerful  as 
they  are,  we  mean  the  symbolic  laws,  and  the  sym- 
bols, will  at  present  interfere  with  its  simplicity  and 
will  eventually  only  corroborate  it;  they  w^ill  dem- 
onstrate it,  and  that  in  a  most  effective  manner  by 
the  completion  of  all  the  details.     But  the  plan  itself 


PL4N  AND   DESIGN.  307 

can  rest,  and  should  be  made  to  appear  to  rest  on  an 
independent  basis.  It  is  competent  to  stand  on  its  own 
merits;  the  evidence  on  which  it  is  founded,  it  is 
perfectly  conceivable,  may  indeed  be  of  such  a  na- 
ture that  it  can  be  affirmed  of  it  with  truth,  this 
'iivust  be  the  plan,  no  matter  what  the  particulars  or 
what  the  details  may  be.  The  allegation  may  be 
truly  made,  that  it  is  impossible  they  should  conflict 
with  the  plan.  On  such  evidence  as  this  we  believe 
the  plan  developed  for  the  Revelation  in  the  preceding 
pages  does  rest.  It  rests  on  such  evidence  that  it  is 
impossible  to  conceive  that  the  particulars  should  not 
agree  with  it.  Let  us  glance  for  a  moment  at  the 
evidence ;  we  shall  see  its  strength.  It  rests,  first  of 
all,  on  the  fundamental  laws  of  that  kind  of  composi- 
tion in  which  the  j)rophet  writes,  the  violation  of 
which  is  impossible,  since  he  would  then  cease  to 
be  intelligible.  It  rests  farther  on  certain  leading 
characters  which  the  prophet  has  inscribed  on  his 
work  ;  for,  in  truth,  the  outlines  of  the  j)lan  in  question 
are  all  afforded  by  the  prophet  himself.  Are  they 
not  ?  The  reduplication  is  certainly  sketched  by  the 
"  silence  ;  "  the  quaternal  structure  by  the  "  Come 
and  See,"  of  the  living-creatures;  the  unity  of  the 
prophecy  by  its  comprehension  in  one  seven-sealed 
book ;  the  victory  of  the  kingdom  of  God  is  sounded 
forth  by  the  animating  strains  addressed  to  the  seven 
churches  to  press  on  to  the  mark  of  victory ;  the  Ro- 
man dominion  is  proclaimed  to  be  the  enemy  by  the 
interpretation  in  ch.  xvii.,  which  conclusively  shows 
that  three  combatants  are  Roman,  which  are  all  the 


308  PLAN  AND  DESIGN.  ' 

combatants.  These  are  certainly  the  essential  fea- 
tures of  the  plan  and  design ;  it  is  into  these  that  all 
the  particulars  and  details  of  the  prophecy  must  be 
filled  in  and  dovetailed.  But  to  suppose  that  these 
details  will  not  fit  into  the  general  design  is  as  incon- 
ceivable as  that  the  bones  of  a  skeleton  should  not 
fit  in  to  that  skeleton  to  which  they  belong,  or  that 
the  assemblage  of  all  the  parts  of  a  whole  should  not 
constitute  that  whole  itself. 

This  is  the  conspicuous  excellence  which  the  dem- 
onstration of  symbolic  prophecy  exhibits.  Every 
position  in  it  rests  on  its  own  independent  basis. 
Thus  reduplication  rests  upon  its  own  foundation,  the 
quaternal  structure  upon  its  basis  ;  unity  of  design 
rests  upon  its  own  pillars,  but  all  these  mutually  cor- 
roborate and  demonstrate  each  other,  and  form  to- 
gether a  structure  which  sets  skepticism  at  scorn. 
The  plan  likewise  rests  upon  its  own  basis,  but  the 
harmony  of  the  details  of  this  plan  and  the  correspon- 
dence of  all  these  with  the  events  of  history  prove  it 
a  second  time,  and  this  time  with  a  force  of  demon- 
stration which  it  is  alone  within  the  compass  of  in- 
spiration to  yield. 

Well  assured,  then,  of  the  soundness  of  the  plan, 
both  because  it  is  founded  in  the  laws  of  symbolic 
composition,  which  John  must  observe,  and  which 
there  is  evidence  that  he  does  observe,  and  because 
it  is  the  plan,  the  outlines  of  which  are  drawn  by  the 
hand  of  the  prophet  himself,  we  proceed  to  state  the 
general  features  of  it. 

"  The  Eevelation  of  Jesus  Christ  which  God  gave 


PLAN  AND  DESIGN.  309 

unto  him,"  is  in  the  introductory  vision  as  described 
in  ch.  iv.  and  v.,  represented  to  be  delivered  in  one 
seven-sealed  book  IVom  the  right  hand  of  God  on  the 
throne,  to  the  Lamb,  who  receives  it  to  open  the  seals 
of  it.  The  unity  of  the  prophecy  is  here  expressed. 
The  seven  seals  the  Lamb  opens  in  unbroken  succes- 
sion, and  displays  the  sights  eliminated  to  the  pro- 
phet without  suspension,  until  the  seventh  seal  is 
broken,  when  "  a  silence  about  the  space  of  half  an 
hour"  takes  place,  dividing  the  representations  of 
the  seventh  seal  from  those  of  the  six  preceding  seals. 
The  double  version  of  the  prophecy  is  thus  indicated, 
for  the  prophecy,  which  is  undivided  in  itself,  is  di- 
vided in  representation !  The  four  living-creatures 
call  the  prophet's  attention  to  the  four  pictures  of  the 
first  four  seals.  The  quaternal  structure  is  here  in- 
dicated, and  the  unity  of  the  subject  in  a  fourfold 
form  is  proclaimed.  On  the  ground  of  the  analogy 
constituted  by  this  introduction  with  those  of  Daniel 
vii.  2,  and  Zech.  vi.  1,  the  four  subjects  introduced 
and  originated  are  necessarily  political  dominions  of 
the  first  magnitude  in  the  history  of  the  world,  reck- 
oned from  the  date  of  the  proj^hecy  up  till  the  point 
of  time  at  which  symbolic  prophecy  terminates, 
namely,  the  destruction  of  the  fourth  dominion  of  the 
world,  i.  e.,  the  Roman,  and  the  establishment  on  its 
ruins  of  that  dominion  of  the  saints,  w^hich  runs  the 
race  with  this  for  the  supremacy  of  the  world,  and 
eventually  wins  the  prize.  The  four  greatest  do- 
minions within  this  space  of  time  are  thus  declared 
to  constitute  the  whole  subject  of  the  prophecy.    The 


310  PLAN  AND  DESIGN. 

origination  of  the  subject  from  a  common  source, 
which  is  eflfected  by  this  introduction,  involves  the 
same  conclusion. 

In  this  subject  there  is  an  extremely  small  field 
chalked  out  for  the  application  of  the  whole  imagery 
of  the  prophecy;  the  symbolic  signs  are  of  an  ex- 
tremely simple  nature ;  the  subjects  to  which  they 
are  applicable,  though  grand,  are  likewise  simple  ;  it 
neither  requires  any  stretch  of  ingenuity  nor  learning 
to  fix,  what  are  the  four  greatest  dominions  in  the 
world's  history  within  the  time  designed.  If  it  be 
admitted  that  the  kingdom  of  God  is  one  of  these 
great  dominions,  which  can  hardly  be  gainsaid  by  any 
one  who  reads  his  Bible  or  studies  histor}^,  and  that 
the  greatest  ecclesiastical  dominion  within  the  time 
specified  is  another,  which,  also,  is  a  proposition  which 
can  hardly  be  disputed,  the  recognition  of  the  four 
dominions  is  very  easily  eifected.  The  kingdom  of 
God,  the  Koman  Empire,  the  Papacy  as  a  temporal 
power,  and  the  Eomish  Church  as  a  strictly  ecclesias- 
tical dominion,  are  necessarily  the  four  in  question. 
Tliere  are  certainly  no  two  temporal  dominions  within 
the  time  that  will  vie  with  the  Eoman  Empire  and 
Papacy,  in  respect  of  greatness,  if  influence  and  ex- 
tent of  duration  be  considered  which,  in  this  regard, 
are  the  true  measures  of  greatness.  The  Pomish 
Church,  on  the  other  hand,  stands  alone  and  unrivalled 
as  the  giant  ecclesiastical  dominion  of  the  period  ;  its 
very  pre-eminence  convicts  it  to  be  the  Whore,  with- 
out any  farther  characteristic ;  the  garment  of  worldly 


PLAK  AND  DESIGN.  311 

grandeur  is  the  criminal's  garb  in  which  it  uncon- 
scionsly  passes  on  to  judgment. 

By  the  use  of  a  single  means  of  interpretation, 
then,  by  the  application,  namely,  of  that  special 
feature  in  tlie  structure  of  the  prophecy,  which  con- 
sists in  the  introduction  and  origination  of  the  sub- 
ject by  the  four  living-creatures,  the  whole  subject 
of  the  prophecy  in  its  great  divisions  may  be  deter- 
mined. The  same  introduction  gives  a  key  by  which 
its  design  may  be  predicated. 

But  the  suggestive  circumstances  attending  the 
delivery  of  the  prophecy  reveal  the  same  subject.  It 
is  the  Revelation  of  Jesus  Christ.  According  to 
Scripture  Christ  fulfils  three  offices,  those  of  prophet, 
priest  and  king.  But  the  first  two  of  these  he  fully 
exhausted  during  his  career  on  earth;  the  kingly 
crown  he  rejected  at  this  period,  but  he  reserved  it 
to  the  future,  as  is  evident  from  the  words  which  he 
addressed  to  Pilate,  saying  to  him,  "  now  is  my  king- 
dom not  from  hence,"  John,  ch.  xviii.  36,  in  the 
qualifying  now,  clearly  reserving  it  to  that  future  era 
at  which,  according  to  prophecy,  it  should  be  deliver- 
ed to  him.  The  Revelation  then  cannot  respect  the 
two  first  offices,  for  it  is  a  prophecy,  and  these  are 
past ;  it  must  respect  the  last  of  the  three,  his  kingly 
office,  which  is  future.  The  tenor  of  the  book  bears 
witness  to  this  conclusion ;  the  letters  to  the  seven 
churches  corroborate  it,  for  in  each  of  them  they  are 
animated  to  strive  to  obtain  this  kingship,  wliich  is 
not  only  Christ's,  but  theirs,  their  destiny  being  to 
become  "  kings  and  priests  unto  God,"  and  "  reign  on 


312  PLAN  AND  DESIGN. 

the  earth."  But  this  kingship,  the  attainment  of 
which,  Loth  for  Christ  and  his  followers,  is  the  grand 
burden  of  the  Revelation,  is,  according  to  Daniel, 
reversionary  to  them  upon  the  destruction  of  the 
fourth  w^orld-dominion,  which  is  the  Roman.  The 
destruction  of  this  dominion,  on  the  other  hand,  is 
procured  by  the  efforts  of  the  saints,  as  is  evident 
from  Daniel,  ch.  ii.,  where  the  stone  cut  out  without 
hands,  wdiich  symbolizes  their  kingdom,  smites  the 
image  which  prefigures  the  Roman  dominion,  and 
destroys  the  latter.  It  necessarily  follows,  that  the 
relations  of  the  kingdom  of  God  to  the  Roman  do- 
minion will  be  one  subject  of  the  Revelation.  But  it 
follows  that  it  will  be  the  sole  subject,  because,  ac- 
cording to  Daniel,  it  is  the  sole  obstacle  in  the  way 
of  that  consummation  which  is  predicted.  The  sug- 
gestive circumstances,  then,  attending  the  delivery 
of  the  prophecy,  likewise  determine  the  sole  subject 
of  the  Revelation  to  be  the  relations  of  the  kingdom 
of  God  to  the  fourth  dominion  of  the  world. 

But  the  interpretation  in  ch.  xvii.  not  only  en- 
forces, but  gives  demonstrative  effect  to  the  conclusion 
thus  arrived  at.  According  to  it  the  seven  heads  of 
the  Beast  prefigure  a  Roman  dominion,  while  the 
ten  horns  have  the  same  import,  as  appears  from  the 
interpretation,  as  well  as  from  the  circumstance  that 
they  are  found  on  the  fourth  beast  of  Daniel,  which 
is  interpreted  to  stand  for  the  fourth  dominion,  which 
is  the  Roman.  But  the  Dragon  has  likewise  seven 
heads  and  ten  horns,  so  that  it  also  stands  for  a 
Roman  dominion.     But  there  is  an  ecclesiastical  do- 


PLAN   AND   DESIGN  313 

minion  in  the  book,  wliicli  is  in  combination  with  one 
of  these,  so  that  three  dominions  are  Roman.  The 
kingdom  of  God,  however,  makes  the  fourth  dominion 
of  the  book.  It  necessarily  follows,  then,  that  as 
there  are  only  four  dominions  in  it,  this  kingdom  and 
three  Roman  dominions  constitute  the  whole  sub- 
ject of  it. 

Such  is  the  subject  determined  by  the  three 
means  of  interpretation  to  which  reference  has  been 
made.  Let  us  follow  the  prophet's  handling  of  it  in 
the  two  versions  of  which  his  prophecy  has  been 
shown  to  consist. 

Taking  up  the  first  version,  which  is  delivered  in 
chapters  vi.  and  vii.,  we  find  that  it  contains  the  repre- 
sentation of  four  dominions.  These  appear  under  the 
symbols  of  the  four  horses  and  riders  of  the  first  four 
seals.  This  is  that  quaternal  group  which  symbolic 
prophecy  manifests  in  its  representations  of  political 
dominions,  which  these  symbols  must  be  interpreted 
to  be,  on  the  ground,  as  has  been  shown,  of  the 
manner  in  which  they  are  introduced.  They  do  not 
represent  the  state  of  an  empire,  much  less  of  the 
church,  for  a  given  time,  an  application  which  has  been 
frequently  but  very  erroneously  given  to  them.  The 
analogy  between  Daniel  and  Zechariah  referred  to, 
discoverable  in  the  mode  of  their  introduction,  deter- 
mines these  four  horses,  with  their  riders,  to  represent 
four  separate  and  distinct  dominions  alone  in  all  their 
entirety,  and  in  the  whole  extent  of  their  duration, 
subsequent  to  the  date  of  the  prophecy.  The  analogy 
observable  in  the  introduction,  as  well  as  the  origina- 
14 


314  PLAN   AND   DESIGN. 

tion  made  of  the  subject,  involves  this  conclusion. 
They  also  necessitate  the  conclusion  that  these  four 
dominions  are  all  the  dominions  which  the  prophecy 
concerns. 

In  the  four  equestrian  figures,  then,  of  the  first 
four  seals,  we  have  a  representation  of  the  four  do- 
minions which  the  prophecy  predicts  concerning ;  one 
of  these  is  a  conquering  dominion,  and  the  three 
others  are  three  defeated  antagonists,  as  well  from  the 
representation  here  made,  as  because  the  whole  plot 
of  the  prophecy,  as  more  minutely  developed  in  the 
second  version,  turns  upon  the  victory  of  a  conqueror 
who  wars  with  three  antagonists,  who  suffers  under 
and  is  oppressed  by  them  for  42  months,  or  1260 
symbolical  days,  but  who  gains  a  final  victory  over 
them,  who  takes  two  of  them  under  the  form  of  the 
Beast  and  the  False  Prophet,  and  casts  them  into  a 
lake  of  fire  and  brimstone,  and  who  seizes  the  third, 
the  Dragon,  and  casts  him  likewise  into  a  lake  of  fire 
and  brimstone.  The  prophet  then  places  on  his  canvas 
here  the  four  combatants  in  that  war,  the  description 
of  w^hich  forms  the  burden  of  his  prophecy.  They 
are  here  represented  as  going  forth  to  the  contest  with 
their  weapons;  the  last  having  no  weapon,  for  a 
reason  that  has  been  already  mentioned,  namely,  that 
it  is  an  ecclesiastical  power. 

The  representations  of  the  four  dominions  here 
made  are  not  so  minute  and  particular,  are  not  accom- 
panied with  the  same  detail,  nor  are  the  portraitures 
so  distinct  as  the  corresponding  representations  in  the 
second  version  of  the  prophecy.     The  portraitures  in 


% 

PLAK   AOT)   DESIGN.  315 

chs.  xii.  and  xiii.  are  in  the .  highest  degree  graphic 
and  distinct.  Here  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the 
Woman  clothed  with  the  sun  stands  for  the  kingdom 
of  God,  that  the  great  red,  seven-headed,  ten-horned 
Dragon  stands  for  the  Roman  Empire — that  the 
seven-headed  ten-horned  Beast  stands  for  the  Pa- 
pacy, as  a  temporal  power,  and  the  Two-horned  Beast 
represents  the  Eomish  Church.  Still  the  delineations, 
here  are  sufficiently  distinct  in  themselves,  and  they 
may  legitimately  be  shown  to  indicate  these  do- 
minions with  absolute  precision  and  exactness,  even 
without  any  reference  at  all  to  the  second  version. 
Such  are  the  four  dominions  here  displayed  as  they 
enter  the  lists  prepared  to  wrestle  for  the  prize,  the 
dominion  of  the  world.  It  is  a  contest  in  which  one 
combatant  is  opposed  to  three,  as  the  representation 
under  the  four  seals  itself  imports,  where  a  single 
victor  is  ranged  with  three  antagonists,  as  the  rela- 
tion^ of  the  living-creatures  to  the  respective  com- 
batants show,  and  as  the  whole  tenor  of  the  prophecy 
throughout  establishes. 

The  fifth  and  sixth,  the  remaining  seals  of  the  first 
version,  represent  the  general  character  of  the  events 
predicted  in  reference  to  the  four  dominions,  of  which 
the  representation  has  been  made  in  the  foregoing 
seals.  The  fifth  seal,  under  the  symbolization  of  the 
souls  of  the  saints  under  the  altar,  calling  for  ven- 
geance for  their  shed  blood,  prefigures  the  character 
of  these  events  07i  the  one  side  as  being  persecutions 
of  the  church  by  its  enemies,  and  its  oppression  by 
them  for  an  appointed  time,  which  period  of  time  in 


316  PLAN   AND   DESIGN. 

the  second  version  is  .defined  exactly  to  be  1260 
years.  The  vision  here  disclosed  may  be  legitimately 
applied  to  the  greatest  act  of  persecution  inflicted  on 
the  church ;  this  act,  however,  is  to  be  regarded  here 
as  the  representative  at  the  same  time  of  the  whole. 
This  seal  then  predicts  the  persecution  of  the  church, 
and  holds  out  the  prospect  of  triumph. 

The  sixth  seal  represents  the  character  of  the 
events  of  the  prophecy  on  the  other  side  as  being  judg- 
ments on  the  enemies  of  the  church  and  its  final  victory. 
The  judgments  are  represented  under  the  symbolical 
image  of  a  mighty  tempest,  which,  properly  speaking, 
prefigures  the  last  judgment,  but  is  to  be  understood 
here  as  representing  all  the  judgments;  a  tempest, 
convulsing  all  the  material  universe  ;  as  a  result  of 
this  judgment  the  political  firmament  departs  away 
as  a  scroll  w^hen  it  is  rolled  together,  every  state  and 
kingdom  of  the  Roman  world — the  world  subjected 
to  this  judgment — reels  in  its  foundations  and  falls, 
for  the  firmament  itself  departs  away,  while  those 
who  had  enjoyed  power  and  pre-eminence  in  it  are 
hurled  from  their  places,  and  scattered  like  leaves 
from  the  tempest-beaten  fig-tree.  The  security  of  the 
kingdom  of  God  during  this  ordeal  of  judgment  is 
represented  by  the  sealing  of  the  12  tribes  of  Israel, 
described  in  ch.  vii.  1-8.  This  tempest  of  judgment 
has  overwhelmed  the  power  of  the  Roman  enemy ; 
the  kingdom  of  God  reigns  trumphant  upon  the  de- 
struction of  its  mighty  adversary  as  the  final  and  ever- 
lasting dominion  on  earth.  This  glorious  consumma- 
tion is  described  in  that  magnificent  vision  which 


PLAN   AND  DESIGN.  317 

closes  ell.  vii.j  the  representations  of  the  six  seals  and 
the  first  version  of  the  prophecy.  The  application 
above  made  of  the  visions  of  the  fifth  and  sixth  seals 
to  the  relationship  of  the  kingdom  of  God  to  the 
Eoman  dominion,  is  necessitated  bv  a  regard  to  the 
representations  of  the  first  four  seals,  and  nnity  and 
consistency  of  design  in  the  prophetical  composition. 

The  seventh  seal  is  broken,  and  with  the  breaking 
of  this  seal  which,  by  the  arrangement  made,  is  un- 
divided from  the  previous  six,  as  it  should  be,  since 
the  prophecy  delivered  in  the  seven-sealed  book  is 
one  revelation,  the  first  and  comparatively  short  de- 
livery of  it  ends. 

At  this  point  in  the  review  of  the  plan  and  design 
of  the  prophecy,  let  us  pause  for  a  moment  and  direct 
our  attention  to  a  portion,  at  least,  of  the  internal 
evidence  which  presents  itself  of  the  Double  Ver- 
sion. This  will  not  be  a  work  of  superfluity.  If  the 
prophecy  is  twice  delivered,  it  is  essential  to  the  in- 
terpretation to  know  it;  it  is  indeed  impossible  to 
advance  a  step  in  the  interpretation  without  having 
decided  the  question  whether  it  is  single  or  double ; 
and  if  it  is  twice  delivered,  we  are  then  in  possession 
of  a  commentary  better  than  all  others,  since  it  is 
from  the  prophet's  own  hand.  With  this  object  in 
view,  we  shall  now  call  attention  to  the  weighty 

Internal  Evidence  of  Eeduplication, 

which  is  furnished  by  the  following  facts  : 

1st.  The  "  silence  in  heaven  about  the  space  of 
half  an  hour,"  ch.  viii.  1. 


318  PLAN   AND   DESIGN. 

2<^.  The  peculiar  and  anomalous  position  of  this 
pause,  which  is  after  the  breaking  of  a  seal. 

Zd.  The  circumstance  that  the  subject  is  ended  at 
this  pause,  and  tliat  what  follows  the  pause  is  a  repe- 
tition of  it. 

Aitli,  The  address  of  the  living-creatures  to  John 
to  "  Come  and  see  "  the  representations  of  the  first 
four  seals. 

htli.  The  perfectness  and  Scriptural  character  of 
the  plan  of  the  prophecy  which  reduplication  de- 
livers. 

The  first,  the  "  silence  in  heaven  about  the  space 
of  half  an  hour,"  is  a  notable  fact  in  the  delivery  of 
the  prophecy.  It  must  have  a  meaning.  What  is 
it  ?  This  is  a  question  which  judicious  commentators 
have  declined  answering,  and  to  which  the  foolish 
have  given  foolish  answers.  Keduplication  answers 
it  at  once.  This  is  the  division  between  the  first  and 
the  second  versions  of  the  prophecy.  This  is  a  plau- 
sible answer ;  let  us  see  if  it  is  as  sound  as  it  is  plau- 
sible. It  is  the  design  of  the  prophecy,  as  has  been 
already  shown  and  proved  on  the  ground  of  unity  in 
its  design,  to  deliver  itself  in  a  series  of  pictures  con- 
tained within  a  seven-sealed  book.  Now  wdiatever  is 
not  contained  in  this  seven-sealed  book  cannot  con- 
sistently, with  this  design,  be  regarded  as  forming 
any  part  of  the  prophecy.  It  is  the  design  to  deliver 
the  prophetic  revelations  in  pictures  on  the  seven- 
sealed  book  ;  in  the  silence  there  is  no  picture,  con- 
sequently there  is  no  prophecy.  Yet,  although  not 
prophetical,  it  is  a  main  and  striking  feature  of  a 


PLAN   AND   DESIGN.  319 

prophetical  book ;  it  is  such  a  pause  as  cannot  have 
been  made  without  design,  and  cannot  be  regarded  as 
without  meaning.  It  is  not  prophetical,  but  yet  it 
must  have  meaning.  What  is  it?  Kowtliere  can  be 
but  two  meanings  attached  to  it  when  its  prophetical 
character  is  discarded,  as  it  must  be,  to  one  or  other 
of  which  we  must  have  resort.  It  will  be  difficult  to 
conceive  of  any  other  except  two.  One  of  these  is 
that  which  is  to  be  found  in  many  commentaries,  to 
wit,  that  it  gives  an  air  of  dignity  to  the  seven  trum- 
pets which  follow.  It  is  held  tliat  a  suspension  of 
representation  for  half  an  hour  has  been  inserted  here 
to  impress  the  mind  with  the  importance  and  awful- 
ness  of  what  is  predicted  imder  the  seven  trumpets. 
This  is  one  meaning,  if  it  can  be  called  a  meaning ; 
it  is  much  more  a  device.  The  other  meaning,  and 
it  is  reall}^  such,  is  that  it  forms  a  division  of  the 
prophecy  into  two  parts,  which  parts  are  two  ver- 
sions. 'Now  let  us  consider  if  the  first  meaning  be 
tenable ;  if  it  be  not  tenable,  the  other  will  necessarily 
follow.  The  first  miglit  be  more  tenable  than  it  is  if 
there  were  any  other  pause  in  the  book  of  a  similar 
kind,  in  virtue  of  which  it  might  support  itself  on 
the  ground  of  an  analogy  draw^n  between  them.  Thus 
if  there  were  a  silence,  say  of  one  hour's  duration, 
before  the  representation  of  the  four  great  dominions 
of  the  book,  or  any  great  dominions  represented  in  it, 
or  if  there  were  a  pause  of  a  quarter  of  an  hour,  or 
Bome  other  definitely  measured  space  of  time  to  be 
found  in  it,  but  there  is  nothing  of  the  kind.  It  can- 
not be  held,  then,  as  any  thing  else  but  an  anomaly  of 


820  PLAN   AND   DESIGN. 

a  very  strange  character  that  there  should  be  a  pause 
of  about  half  an  hour's  duration  before  the  trumpets. 
"Why  should  the  trumjoets  have  this  special  honor, 
which  is  not  accorded  to  any  other  vision  in  the  book  ? 
But  the  sense  itself  attributed  is  highly  objectionable. 
Does  not  such  a  mode  of  impressing  the  mind  Avith 
dignity  descend  to  the  level  of  puerility  ?  It  is  such 
a  device  as  might  be  conceived  to  be  adopted  by  a 
raree-showman,  exhibiting  a  spectacle  to  boys.  It 
is  a  device  known  to  have  been  practised  on  men  by 
certain  monarchs,  who  have  caused  their  subjects  to 
wait  upon  their  presence  for  precisely  that  length  of 
time  which  they  held  to  be  commensurate  with  their 
exalted  majesty.  But  it  appears  to  us  that  such  a 
device  as  this  is  beneath  the  simple  dignity  of  this 
great  symbolic  work,  and  that  on  this  ground  alone  it 
is  untenable.  But  besides  this,  there  is  no  ground  for 
saying  that  the  silence  gives  dignity  to  the  trumpets, 
for  if  it  gives  dignity  at  all,  it  gives  dignity  not  alone 
to  the  trumpets,  but  to  all  that  follows  it.  There  is 
nothing  which  divides  the  trumpets  from  the  remain- 
der of  the  representations  of  the  book ;  there  is 
no  subsequent  pause.  The  shadow  of  dignity,  then, 
must  be  conceived  to  pass  from  the  silence  itself  on 
to  the  end  of  the  book,  seeing  that  its  eifect  is  un- 
broken. If  it  gives  dignity  to  any  thing  at  all,  then, 
it  gives  dignity  to  the  representations  of  the  seventh 
seal,  for  these  are  what  follow  it.  This  is  one  mean- 
ing ;  it  is  barely  tenable,  and  if  tenable  at  all,  it  is 
reconcilable  with  regarding  the  pause  as  an  adver- 
tisement of  the  second  and  more  perfect  version  of 


PLAN    AND   DESIGN.  321 

the  prophecy  in  the  seventh  seaL  Bnt  the  other 
meaning  will  stand  on  its  own  merits  ;  it  is  not  a 
jejnne  device,  but  is  masculine  sense.  According  to 
it  the  "  silence  "  is  the  mark  of  division  between  tlie 
first  and  the  second  versions  of  the  prophecy.  This 
sense  is  simple  and  good.  It  is,  moreover,  impossible 
to  deprive  the  pause  of  this  meaning,  even  if  we  could 
find  another,  for  every  pause  necessarily  forms  a 
division.  Let  the  mind  do  as  it  w^ill,  it  cannot 
separate  the  idea  of  a  division  from  a  pause  measured 
out  to  the  extent  of  about  the  space  of  half  an  hour 
in  a  series  of  continuous  representations.  This  mode 
of  forming  a  division  is  recognized  by  the  propliet 
himself,  who  divides  the  representations  of  his  proph- 
ecy one  from  another,  by  giving  us  to  understand,  as 
he  does  on  many  occasions,  that  a  lapse  of  time 
occurred  between  them.  He  plainly,  then,  recog- 
nizes the  principle  of  marking  a  division  of  represen- 
tation by  the  division  of  time,  although  he  nowhere 
divides  by  a  definite  period  excepting  here.  We  find 
also  this  principle  of  marking  a  division  recognized 
and  operative  in  the  double  symbolic  prophecies. 
The  one  version  is  divided  from  the  other  by  a  lapse 
of  time.  The  prediction  regarding  Joseph's  future 
greatness  is  delivered  twice  to  him  in  two  sets  of 
symbols,  and  with  an  interval  between  each  representa- 
tion, of  what,  as  appears  from  the  narrative,  was  a 
day  at  least.  Gen.  xxxvii.  5-11.  An  interval  is  also 
marked  in  the  double  dream  of  Pharaoh,  for  Pharaoh 
aAvoke,  slept,  and  "  dreamed  the  second  time,"  Gen. 
xli.  4  and  5.  In  the  double  prediction  of  Daniel,  chs.  ii. 
14* 


322  PLAN   AND   DESIGN. 

and  vii.,  there  occurs  an  interval  of  a  very  long 
period,  for  the  first  version  of  the  prophecy  is  delivered 
under  one  monarch,  and  the  second  under  another. 
It  is  not  only  then  the  natural  and  necessary  effect  of 
an  interval  of  time  to  form  a  division,  but  it  is,  as  is 
apparent,  the  method  adopted  in  Scripture  to  form  it. 
When  it  is  said,  then,  tliat  "  the  silence  in  heaven 
about  the  space  of  half  an  hour  "  has  the  meaning,  or 
let  it  be  rather  said,  has  the  effect  of  giving  dignity 
to  the  representations,  this,  which  is  nearly  void  of 
meaning,  is  also  fanciful  and  destitute  of  support 
from  any  part  of  Scripture,  or  from  any  mode  of 
representation  followed  in  it.  But  when  we  say,  on 
the  other  hand,  that  its  meaning  is  to  form  a  division, 
this,  it  is  obvious,  is  an  interpretation  which  is  based 
on  a  principle  of  representation  developed  in  Scrip- 
ture. According  to  Scripture  an  interval  in  the  rep- 
resentation divides.  We  appear  then  shut  up  to  the 
conclusion,  that  the  silence  in  heaven  for  about  the 
space  of  "half  an  hour"  forms  a  division  of  the 
prophecy  into  two  grand  2:>arts.  But  it  cannot  divide 
the  2)i*ophecy  itself,  for  according  to  the  title  it  is 
one  ;  it  is  "  the  Eevelation  of  Jesus  Christ  which  God 
gave  unto  him."  Here  is  a  paradox,  but  reduplication 
explains  the  seeming  paradox,  and  it  alone  explains 
it.  How  strong  an  argument  is  there  here  for  redupli- 
cation !  We  see  an  explication  of  this  paradoxical 
division  of  what  is  really  one  in  the  dream  of  Pha- 
raoh, wdiich  is  analogical  with  the  Revelation  in  this 
respect  of  containing  a  division  in  it,  and  being  yet 
one.     This  dream  is  twofold  and  one.     Joseph,  after 


TLAN   AND   DESIGN.  323 

having  lieard  Pharaoli  relate  his  two  dreams,  says : 
"  The  dream  of  Pharaoh  is  one,"  and  on  this  ground 
he  adds,  as  being  the  guarantee  of  the  certainty  of  its 
fulfihnent,  "  God  hath  showed  Pharaoh  what  he  is 
about  to  do."  l^ow  the  Kevelation  of  John  is,  in 
consequence  of  the  division  formed  by  "  the  silence," 
equally  twofold,  and,  by  the  title,  is  equally  one  as  is 
the  prophecy  of  Pharaoh  one  and  two-fold.  The  in- 
terpreter of  this  book  then  ought  to  interpret  in  the 
same  manner  as  Joseph.  What  does  Joseph  do? 
Joseph  says,  "  The  seven  good  kine  are  seven  years  ; 
and  the  seven  good  ears  are  seven  years  ;  the  dream 
is  one."  The  interpreter  of  the  Kevelation,  seeing 
that  a  division  prevails  in  this  prophecy  analogical  to 
that  which  prevails  in  that  of  Pharaoh,  is  bound  to 
walk  in  the  footsteps  of  Joseph,  and  say  "  the  four 
Horsemen  in  the  first  four  seals  are  four  dominions," 
and  the  Woman  and  three  Beasts,  in  chs.  xii.  and  xiii., 
are  four  dominions ;  "  the  vision  is  one."  And  in  the 
same  way  as  Joseph  proceeds  with  the  remaining 
part  of  Pharaoh's  prophecj^,  giving  to  the  double 
representation  the  same  sense,  so  ought  he  to  do  with 
tlie  remainder  of  the  Revelation.  Instead  of  revolt- 
ing against  this  authority,  he  has  cause  of  thankful- 
ness that  he  has  such  authority,  and  he  ought  with 
zeal  to  apply  the  key  w^iich  the  double  version  fur- 
nishes. 

There  is  between  the  two  cases  nothing  to  disturb 
the  analogy.  Pharaoh's  prophecy  indeed  was  deliv- 
ered during  the  night;  John's  during  the  day;  Pha- 
raoh's was  in  a  dream ;  John's  in  a  vision ;  Pharaoh 


324  PLAN   AND   DESIGN. 

awoke,  slept,  and  dreamed  the  second  time  ;  John  ex- 
perienced a  "  silence  for  about  the  space  of  half  an 
hour,"  during  which  he  saw  nothing.  These  circum- 
stances cannot  be  regarded  as  disturbing  the  analogy, 
nor  can  they  affect  the  principle  of  interpretation  to 
be  applied.  It  cannot  be  objected  that  there  is  this 
discrepancy  between  the  two  cases,  that  the  time  is 
measured  in  John's  prophecy,  while  in  Pharaoh's  it 
is  not  measured.  This  difference  is  accounted  for  by 
the  difference  in  the  nature  of  the  two  compositions. 
John's  is  a  vision  ;  Pharaoh's  is  a  dream.  The  divi- 
sion is  expressed  with  reference  in  both  cases  to  the 
peculiar  circumstances  under  which  the  prophecy  is 
delivered.  Pharaoh,  who  is  in  his  bed,  dreams, 
awakes,  and  dreams  a  second  time  ;  John,  who  is  in 
heaven,  sees  visions,  experiences  a  suspension  of  them 
for  about  the  space  of  half  an  hour,  and  sees  visions  a 
second  time.  Such  differences  as  these  can  neither 
affect  the  analogy  nor  the  principle  of  interpretation 
founded  on  it.  The  main  features  in  both  instances 
are  the  same.  Both  are  predictions  delivered  by  God 
to  man ;  both  are  predictions  which  are  divided  into 
two,  and  are  yet  one.  It  would  indeed  appear  that 
John  had  expressly  modelled  the  reduplication  of  his 
prophecy  after  this  example  in  Genesis.  It  is  certain, 
that  in  no  other  two  prophecies  of  Scripture  is  one- 
ness of  prediction  accom]3anied  by  division  so  strong- 
ly developed,  and  in  no  other  two  is  the  shortness  of 
time  in  the  fulfilment  of  the  events  placed  in  such 
strong  relief.  Is  it  not  a  legitimate  conclusion,  that  this 
shortness  of  time  in  the  fulfilment,  which  is^  by  no 


PLAN   AND   DESIGN.  325 

means  a  cliaracteristic  of  the  events  of  tlie  Kevela- 
tion,  lias  been  set  in  its  place  to  lead  the  mind  to  the 
analogy  in  the  structure  of  the  two  predictions  ?  It 
is  not  easy  to  account  for  the  insistence  of  the  short- 
ness in  the  fulfilment  of  the  Eevelation,  except  that 
this  is  an  indication  of  its  reduplicating  character. 

Secondly,  the  position  of  the  pause  exhibits  an 
anomaly  which  reduplication  can  only  explain.  The 
position  of  the  pause  after  the  breaking  of  the  seventh 
seal  is  anomalous,  and  even  unnatural.  The  seals  are 
broken  for  the  very  purpose  of  showing  the  represen- 
tations to  John,  as  is  evident  from  the  transaction 
which  takes  place  under  the  first  four  seals.  AVhen 
the  first  seal  is  broken  the  first  living-creature  invites 
John  to  "  Come  and  see"  the  representation  of  the 
seal ;  and  this  formality  is  observed  up  to  the  fourth 
seal  inclusive.  When  the  fifth  and  sixth  seals  are 
broken,  he  is  immediately  shown  the  representations 
they  contain.  Without  doubt  we  are  to  understand 
this.  He  writes  down  faithfully,  it  must  be  held,  ac- 
cording to  the  command  given  to  him,  all  that  occurs, 
and  he  certainly  would  have  noticed  any  interrup- 
tion, had  it  taken  place.  But  upon  the  breaking  of 
the  seventh  seal  the  order  of  things  is  changed,  and 
he  is  shown  nothing  at  all.  A  seal  is  broken,  and 
instead  of  a  vision  a  silence  ensues.  Now  John  was 
exceedingly  desirous  of  looking  into  the  contents  of 
the  seven-sealed  book.  In  the  opening  vision,  op- 
pressed with  the  poignancy  of  his  feeling,  and  with 
the  infirmity  of  a  man,  he  wept  much,  because  it  ap- 
peared that  no  man  was  found  worthy  to  open  and  to 


326  PLAN-   AND   DESIGN. 

read  the  book,  neither  to  look  thereon.  From  these 
words  it  is  plain,  that  in  his  mind,  opening  and  look- 
ing thereon  is  a  natural  connection,  and  it  may  also 
be  concluded,  that  the  opening  of  the  book  has  no 
value  in  his  eyes  without  looking  thereon.  The.  latter 
is  evidently  the  main  object ;  the  former  he  certainly 
regards  as  the  mere  instrumentality  to  it.  Why  then 
is  there  this  tantalization  of  John,  for  without  a  valid 
reason  such  it  is.  Why  is  the  seventh  seal  opened, 
and  the  representations  of  it  not  shown  to  the  prophet  ? 
This  is  a  question  which  must  be  answered.  Are 
they  kept  back  by  reason  of  their  superior  dignity  ? 
This  has  been  discussed.  The  opposite  course  is  fol- 
lowed in  the  first  four  seals,  the  first  of  which  displays 
the  representations  of  the  great  Conqueror  and  his 
combatants,  and  to  look  upon  which  he  is  immediate- 
ly invited.  ISTor  can  it  be  supposed  that  he  was  car- 
ried up  to  heaven  to  be  subjected  to  a  system  of 
moral  training,  and  to  have  his  patience  tried  without 
any  object  at  all.  Why  then  was  John,  the  servant  of 
God,  subjected  to  this  afiliction  in  heaven,  temporary 
and  comparatively  slight  though  it  be,  yet  still  such 
a  tantalization  inflicted  on  the  prophet,  and  such  a 
departure  from  the  usual  order,  as  must  be  accounted 
for  ?  In  one  word,  on  what  ground  is  the  unnatural, 
unartistical,  unreasonable,  and  ungracious  course  fol- 
lowed, for  all  such  it  is,  unless  a  valid  reason  can  be 
assigned  for  it,  of  breaking  open  a  seal  and  thereon 
suspending  the  representation  ?  Eednplication  an- 
swers this  question  at  once,  solves  the  whole  difiiculty 
and  removes  the  ungraciousness.     It  tells  us  that  the 


PLAN   AND   DESIGN.  327 

pause  is  in  the  only  place  in  wliicli  it  could  stand, 
consistently,  with  its  own  existence.  There  is  not 
any  point  in  the  prophecy  from  beginning  to  end,  in 
w^hich  a  "silence"  indicating  reduplication  could  be 
placed,  except  the  position  where  it  stands.  Could 
it  be  placed  in  the  middle  of  the  third  seal  ?  This 
evidently  could  not  be  done  for  several  reasons. 
Could  it  be  placed  immediately  before  the  breaking 
of  the  seventh  seal  ?  N'either  could  this  be  done,  for 
in  this  case  the  seven-sealed  book  were  divided,  which 
is  contrary  to  the  title  which  affirms  the  prophecy  to 
be  one,  and  therefore  indivisible.  It  could  not  be  in- 
serted, then,  anywhere  betwixt  the  seals.  But  after 
the  representations  of  the  seventh  seal  began  no  struc- 
tural division  could  be  formed.  There  is,  according- 
ly, no  place  in  the  whole  prophecy  in  which  it  can 
consistently  stand,  except  the  place  in  which  it  does 
stand.  There  it  has  meaning;  everywhere  else  it 
would  either  have  no  meaning  or  a  wrong  one.  The 
prophecy  is  one,  and  it  is  therefore  necessary  that  all 
the  seven  seals  of  the  seven-sealed  book  which  con- 
tains it  should  be  broken  in  one  undisturbed  and  con- 
tinuous series.  This  is  done.  The  prophecy,  how- 
ever, being  double  in  representation,  it  is  necessary 
that  a  division  clearly  indicating  this  should  be  con- 
structed in  it.  This  is  done  by  the  suspension  of  rep- 
resentation immediateh^  after  the  breakino^  of  the 
seventh  seal  for  a  period  "about  the  space  of  half  an 
hour."  This  pause  divides  the  representations  of  the 
seventh  seal  from  those  of  the  previous  six,  but  at 
the  same  time  preserves   the  unity  of  tlie  prophecy 


328  PLAN   AND   DESIGN. 

unbroken.  ]N"owhere  else  could  tins  design  have 
been  accomplished.  If  reduplication  then  lies  in 
the  design,  the  strange  position  of  the  pause  is  ac- 
countable ;  if  not,  the  position  of  the  silence  is  totally 
inexplicable.  It  is  in  the  place  in  which  it  ought  not 
to  stand,  that  is  after  the  breaking  of  a  seal,  an  oper- 
ation which  is  performed  for  the  very  purpose  of 
showing  the  representations  to  the  prophet.  Here  a 
seal  is  broken,  and  the  representation  is  suspended. 
There  is  no  meaning  in  such  a  course  excepting  one^ 
which  is  that  this  suspension  is  a  sign  of  reduplica- 
tion. "Without  reduplication  then  the  position  of  the 
pause  is  an  anomaly  and  a  blemish  on  the  fair  design 
of  the  work.  It  is  a  thing  not  only  destitute  of  in- 
telligence, but  it  conflicts  with  consistency  of  repre- 
sentation. But  with  reduplication  this  blemish  turns 
into  a  beauty.  This  dark  spot  at  once  blazes  up  with 
light  and  becomes  a  gem  of  the  first  order ;  it  sparkles 
in  the  diadem  of  the  prophecy,  brightly  with  intelli- 
gence, and  it  radiates  its  design,  which  is  one  and  re- 
duplicati7ig.  The  position  of  the  pause  becomes,  when- 
ever reduplication  is  admitted,  a  surpassing  excellence. 
Are  we  to  accept  this  solution,  or  are  we  to  leave  the 
problem  unsolved  ?  Why  should  we  turn  aw^ay  from 
reduplication,  speaking  thus  eloquently  ?  Is  not  the 
interpreter  guilty  of  a  breach  of  trust,  who  abstracts 
from  the  diadem  of  the  prophecy  this  lustrous  gem, 
and  who  leaves  in  its  vacant  place  a  hollow  f 

Thirdly;  the  prophecy  develops  its  whole  subject 
twice,  once  before  the  pause,  and  once  after  it.  It 
w^ere,  of  course,  of  no  moment  w^hatever  to  prove 


PLAN   AND   DESIGN. 

that  tlie  true  meaning  of  the  silence  "  about  the  space 
of  half  an  hour,"  was  a  division  of  the  prophecy  into 
two  versions,  if  it  did  not  stand  precisely  betwixt  the 
two.  Bat  it  does  this.  The  whole  subject  is  devel- 
oped, once  before  the  pause,  and  a  second  time  after 
it.  The  pause  occupies  a  position  at  the  end  of  the 
first  version  and  at  the  beginning  of  the  second.  It 
is  accordingly  in  the  position  in  which  it  ought  to 
stand.  Tliis  indeed  is  no  argument  in  favor  of  re- 
duplication ;  but  it  is  indispensable  to  the  argument 
derived  from  the  "silence."  The  silence  is  simply 
an  indicator  of  something  which  exists.  But  the  fact 
that  the  subject  of  the  prophecy  is  twice  delivered, 
while  it  is  indispensable  to  every  other  argument,  may 
stand  alone.  It  proves  reduplication  itself.  It  is  con- 
ceivable that  reduplication  might  exist  in  the  proph- 
ecy without  any  formal  indication  of  its  existence  at 
all.  It  might  be  in  it  without  any  formal  advertise- 
ment of  it.  But  a  formal  advertisement  shows  that  it 
is  there.  If  a  valid  witness  proves  that  a  man  is  in 
being,  this  is  much  ;  but  if  the  man  himself  appears, 
this  is  much  higher  evidence.  ITow  reduplication 
appears.  It  has  been  already  seen  how  it  manifests 
its  presence  in  the  first  representation.  Tliere  are 
two  distinct  allegories,  having  a  meeting-point  in  a 
prime  symbol,  which  is  common  to  botli,  the  Horse- 
man on  the  wliite  horse.  He  is  the  Conqueror-hero 
of  the  first  allegory,  where  he  is  ranged  with  three 
combatants  ;  the  representation  of  his  glorious  victory 
ends  the  first  allegory.  He  is  the  Conqueror-hero  of 
the  second  allegory,  in  which  in  its  details  the  com- 


330  PLAN  AND   DESIGN. 

bat  is  depicted  with  changeful  imagery,  and  with 
variety  of  design,  but  in  the  main  by  a  conquering 
Horseman  overcoming,  taking  captive,  and  casting 
into  a  lake  of  fire  and  brimstone  three  enemies. 
These  in  the  second  allegory,  are  the  Dragon,  Beast, 
and  False  Prophet ;  in  the  first,  the  Horsemen  on  the 
red,  black,  and  pale  horses.  The  glorious  triumph  of 
the  Concjueror  ends  the  second  allegory  as  it  does  the 
first.  The  first  representation  is  double ;  it  follows 
that  the  second  representation  is  double  likewise. 
Let  us  test  it,  and  see  if  there  are  two  allegories  in  the 
second  sense,  as  well  as  in  the  first ;  and  this  time  let 
us  begin  with  the  dividing  silence,  and  trace  the 
representation  which  precedes  it  backwards.  If  the 
end  of  the  supposed  first  version  is  the  same  as  the 
end  of  the  second,  there  will  be  presumptive  proof 
that  the  beginning  and  middle  are  the  same.  This 
will  be  all  the  stronger  by  reason  of  the  law  of  unity 
of  design  which  prevails  in  symbolic  composition.  It 
is  true  that  commentators,  who  have  a  particular 
theory  of  the  book  to  support,  take  a  very  difi'erent 
view  of  that  magnificent  vision,  representing  the 
l^alm-bearing  multitude  in  heaven,  which  closes 
chap,  vii.,  from  what  general  readers  do.  Many  of 
them  apply  it  to  the  establishment  of  the  Christian 
religion  under  Constantine.  But  we  believe  there  is 
not  a  single  dispassionate  and  unprejudiced  reader  of 
the  book  who  has  no  particular  theory  of  interpreta- 
tion to  support,  who  will  come  to  any  other  conclu- 
sion, but  that  this  vision  has  the  same  meaning,  and 
represents  the  same  grand  consummation,  whatever 


TLAN   AND   DESIGN.  331 

it  be,  wliicli  the  vision  of  the  new  heavens  and  the 
new  earth,  at  the  end  of  the  book,  does.  The  import 
of  the  imagery  is  so  palpably  the  same,  that  this  con- 
clusion irresistibly  forces  itself  npon  the  mind.  But 
the  close  of  the  book  represents,  as  is  admitted  by  all, 
the  final  and  everlasting  triumph  of  the  kingdom  of 
God.  The  closing  vision  of  the  sixth  seal  makes  the 
same  representation,  as  is  esddent  from  the  character 
of  the  imagery,  and  likewise  from  the  events  which 
precede  the  described  triumph.  It  makes  no  matter 
in  regard  to  the  present  argument,  w^hat  the  real 
meaning  of  these  symbolical  representations  is,  whe- 
ther they  describe  the  future  state  of  the  church  in 
heaven  or  on  earth.  It  is  clear  to  every  dispassion- 
ate reader,  so  evidently  identical  is  the  sense  of  the 
imagery,  that  they  represent  the  same  thing.  It  is  the 
saints,  freed  from  warfare  and  from  all  evil,  in  a  state 
of  blessedness,  which  is  represented  in  both  places. 
The  end  of  the  sixth  seal  then  is  the  same  as  the  end 
of  the  seventh.  The  beginning  of  the  sixth  seal  rep- 
resents the  judgments  in  the  great  day  of  the  wrath 
of  the  Lamb,  as  appears  from  ch.  vi.  IT,  which  secure 
that  triumph  of  the  church  described  in  the  two 
visions  just  considered.  These  judgments  precede 
the  triumph  in  the  sixth  seal ;  they  precede  the 
triumph  also  in  the  seventh  seal,  for,  as  is  evident 
from  the  description,  the  same  judgments  take  uj)  a 
considerable  portion  of  the  latter  part  of  this  seal. 
The  fifth  seal  rejDresents  the  persecutions  and  afflic- 
tions of  the  church ;  they  are  also  described  in  the 
seventh  seal  at  greater  length.     These  comprehend 


332  PLAN   AND   DESIGN. 

all  the  events  represented  in  the  first  version.  They 
concern  the  persecution  of  the  church,  the  judgments 
on  its  enemies,  and  its  own  final  triumph.  ]^ow  search 
as  we  msLj  the  seventh  seal,  we  shall  not  detect  a 
single  event  which  does  not  belong  to  one  or  othei*  of 
these  two  categories.  The  events  then  predicted  in 
the  fifth  and  sixth  seals  are  of  the  same  character, 
while,  in  a  concise  and  representative  form,  they  com- 
prehend those  which  appear  in  the  seventh  seaL 
"What  precedes  and  what  follows  the  pause,  then, 
makes  the  same  development,  so  far  as  the  character 
of  the  events  is  concerned.  How  do  these  divisions 
of  the  prophecy  stand  in  regard  to  the  actors  devel- 
oped in  them  ?  In  the  first  part,  there  are  four  of  these 
represented  nnder  the  first  four  seals.  In  the  seventh 
seal  there  are  only  the  four  represented  in  chs.  xii. 
and  xiii.,  two  of  which  are  re-described  in  ch.  xvii., 
and  all  of  which  four  are  represented  as  taking  part 
in  the  events  developed  in  the  seventh  seal.  Are 
these  actors  the  same,  or  are  they  difi*erent  ?  Ee- 
fore  and  after  the  pause,  it  is  equally  a  Conqueror 
and  three  combatants  which  appear.  That  the  Con- 
queror described  under  the  first  seal  is  the  same  as 
the  Conqueror  described  under  the  seventh  seal,  is 
evident,  because  the  sign  is  the  same  in  both  j^laces, 
namely,  a  Horseman  on  a  white  horse,  and  because  it 
is  a  fundamental  law  of  language,  of  the  symbolic  as 
well  as  every  other,  that  the  same  sign  bears  the 
same  signification.  This  is  evidence  which  would  be 
admitted  in  any  work,  but  which  is  much  more  ad- 
missible in  a  symbolic  composition,  to  the  effect,  that 


PLAN   AND   DESIGN.  333 

his   three  comhatants   are   the  same.     But  there  is 
farther  evidence.     The  group  represents  a  Conqueror 
and  his  three  antagonists  ;  but  the  combat  is  not  rep- 
resented here.     It  must  be   represented   elsewhere. 
There  is,  however,  a  combat  detailed  between  a  con- 
queror   on    a  white    horse    and    three    antagonists, 
described  after  the  pause,  and  it  is  the  only  combat 
which  is  described  in  the  book.     It  is  then  the  com- 
bat in  which  the  actors  here  described  engage,  for 
this  combat  must  be  represented  somewhere  in  the 
book,  seeing  that  it  would  be  absurd  to  suppose  these 
figures  were  placed  on  the  canvas  without  any  object 
at  all,  and  it  is  nowhere  else  represented.     Accord- 
ingly, the  Horseman  on  the  white   horse  with   his 
three  antagonists  of  the  seventh  seal,  are  the  conquer- 
ing Horseman  with  his  three  antagonists  of  the  first 
four  seals.     How   stands   the   argument  then  ?     The 
conquering  Horseman  is  the  same  both  before  and 
after  the  pause,  and  this  identity  in  a  symbolic  work, 
of  which  unity  of  design  is  a  fundamental  law,  in- 
volves the  identity  of  his  combatants.     But  the  con- 
quering Horseman  of  the  seventh  seal,  as  well  as  of 
the  first  four  seals,  is  the  kingdom  of  God,  for  this  is 
the  sole  conquering  dominion  developed  in  the  book. 
But  his  three  enemies  in  the  seventh  seal,  the  Dragon, 
Beast,  and  False  prophet,  are  Eoman  enemies,  as  the 
seven  heads  and  ten  horns  on  the  Dragon  and  Beast, 
and  the  combination  of  the  dominion  represented  by 
the  False  prophet,  or  Whore,  or  Two-horned  Beast, 
with  that  represented  by  the  Beast,  prove.     As  his 
three  enemies  of  the  first  Four  seals  are  the  same,  it 


334  PLAN   AND  DESIGN. 

follows  tliey  are  Koman  powers.  The  actors,  there- 
fore, both  before  and  after  the  pause,  are  the  same  in 
the  second  sense,  being  the  kingdom  of  God  and  three 
Eoman  dominions.  Accordingly  the  two  allegories 
deliver  a  prediction  regarding  the  same  events  and 
the  same  dominions. 

Fourthlj ;  the  address  of  the  four  living-creatm-es 
to  John,  to  "  Come  and  see  "  the  representations  of 
the  first  four  seals,  involves  reduplication.  This  invi- 
tation on  the  part  of  the  four  living-creatures  to  Come 
and  see  the  pictures  of  the  first  four  seals,  plainly 
elevates  these  pictures  to  a  platform  of  importance 
above  all  others  in  the  seven-sealed  book.  It  has,  no 
doubt,  been  hitherto  held,  that  this  invitation  is  de- 
livered without  any  meaning  at  all.  But  this  non- 
attribution  of  meaning  presupposes  a  deficiency  in 
the  interpretation,  because  there  is  not  one  thing  in 
the  book  of  which  it  can  be  afiirmed  in  a  stronger 
degree,  that  it  ought  to  have  a  meaning,  than  just 
this  very  thing.  What  is  the  seven-sealed  book  ?  It 
is  a  book  of  pictures :  four  living-creatures,  a  heavenly 
emblem  conspicuous  in  the  introductory  vision,  call 
attention  to  four  pictures  in  it.  If  this  has  no  mean- 
ing, it  may  as  well  be  said  that  the  pictures  are  also 
without  meaning.  If  part  of  the  book  has  no  mean-- 
ing,  the  whole  may  have  no  meaning.  If,  on  the 
other  hand,  it  is  shown  that  this  invitation  has  much 
sense,  it  will  afi'ord  evidence  that  the  pictures  have 
much  sense.  If  part  of  the  book  has  a  deep  meaning, 
it  is  presumptive  evidence  that  the  whole  has  a  deep 
meaning.     If  a  child  calls  attention  to  a  particular 


PLAN  AND  DESIGN.  335 

painting,  the  painting  may  be  insignificant ;  but  if  a 
man  of  intelligence  calls  attention  to  it,  it  may  be 
held  certain  that  it  has  significance.  If  the  portico 
of  a  building  is  ill-built,  it  is  probable  that  the  edifice 
is  ill-built;  but  if  the  portico  shows  the  master-hand, 
it  is  probable  that  the  building  will  display  it.  Kow 
we  have  no  right  to  assume  that  this  part  of  the 
prophet's  work  is  void  of  meaning,  and  is  a  mere  non- 
entity ;  on  the  contrary,  we  not  only  have  the  right, 
but  we  are  under  obligation  to  assume  that  it  is  well 
executed,  and  that  it  has  a  meaning.  If  it  has  a 
meaning,  as  we  are  under  the  necessity  of  assuming 
that  it  has,  what  is  it  ?  It  can  only  have  one  of  two. 
These  living-creatures  either  point  to  the  figures  of 
the  first  four  seals,  because  the  subjects  represented 
by  them  are  of  superior  importance  to  others  in  the 
book,  or  because  they  are  all  the  subjects  in  it.  It 
wnll  be  difiicult  to  conjecture  any  other  meaning. 
'No^v  the  first  is  a  supposed  meaning,  which  is  unten- 
able. The  four  subjects  developed  in  chs.  xii.  andxiii. 
are  at  least  of  equal  importance ;  they  are  described 
at  much  greater  length,  and  they  are  surrounded 
with  emblems  expressive  of  at  least  equal  importance 
and  significance.  They  are  then  at  least  equally  im- 
portant, while  they  cannot  be  more,  so  that  it  is  not 
true  that  the  living-creatures  call  attention  to  these 
subjects,  because  they  are  of  superior  importance. 
We  are  forced  then  to  take  the  other  alternative,  and 
to  conclude  that  they  call  attention  to  the  representa- 
tions of  the  first  four  seals,  because  they  comprehend 
all  the  actors  in  the  prophecy,  the  representations 


336  PLAN  AND   DESIGN. 

developing  iictors,  and  that  the  representations  of 
actors  which  appear  in  chs.  xii.  and  xiii.,  and  which 
can  neither  be  inferior  nor  superior,  are  merely  re- 
duplications of  these. 

But  that  this  is  the  signification  to  be  attached  to 
the  invitation  of  the  four  living-creatures,  namely, 
that  they  develop  all  the  subjects  of  the  prophecy, 
may  be  j)roved  in  another  way.  The  introduction, 
for  the  invitation  being  special  has  in  it  all  the  force 
of  an  introduction,  is,  as  has  been  shown,  modelled 
on  that  made  in  Daniel's  prophecy,  ch.  vii.,  of  the 
four  beasts  by  the  four  winds.  In  Daniel's  pro2)hecy 
the  four  winds  contend  on  the  great  sea,  and  four 
beasts  arise.  In  the  Revelation  four  living-creatures 
say  Come  and  see  four  pictures  in  the  seven-sealed 
book.  The  mode  of  representation  is  strictly  analo- 
gical. But  as  four  winds,  constituting  a  compound 
symbol,  bear  the  same  signification  as  four  living- 
creatures,  constituting  a  compound  symbol,  the  intro- 
duction, is  as  strong  a  case  of  analogy  as  can  well  be 
conceived.  We  therefore  must  conclude  that  as  the 
four  winds  of  Daniel  introduce  all  the  dominions  of 
his  prediction,  so  the  four  living-creatures  of  John 
introduce  all  the  dominions  of  his.  The  introduction 
of  John  being  modelled,  as  it  plainly  is,  after  that  of 
Daniel,  it  is  necessarily,  like  Daniel's,  an  introduction 
which  introduces  all  the  subjects  of  the  prophecy. 
The  origination  which  is  j)erformed  in  this  introduc- 
tion of  the  subject  from  a  common  source,  involves 
the  same  conclusion.  If  the  whole  subject  of  the 
Revelation  is  originated  in  the  first  four  seals,  then 


PLAN  AND   DESIGN.  33T 

all  the  actors  in  the  prophecy  are  developed  in  these 
seals.  It  necessarily  follows  that  the  actors  described 
in  chs.  xii.  and  xiii.  are  the  same,  because  they  cannot 
be  different.  Another  reason  which  points  in  the 
same  direction  may  be  drawn  from  the  non-introduc- 
tion of  the  figures  described  in  chs.  xii.  and  xiii. 
Why  are  those  figures  not  introduced?  They  are  as 
much  principal  subjects,  and  equally  instrumental  in 
the  development  of  the  plot  of  the  prophetical  piece, 
as  the  figures  of  the  four  seals  which  are  introduced. 
On  what  ground  are  these  equally  important  agents 
not  introduced  ?  Unity  of  design  demands  their  in- 
troduction. Why  are  they  not  introduced  ?  JSTo 
other  answer  can  be  returned  to  this  question,  ex- 
cepting that  they  are  the  same,  and  the  impossibility 
of  accounting  for  their  non-introduction  in  any  other 
way  is  evidence  that  they  are  the  same.  Now  there 
are  but  four  agents  before  the  pause  and  four  agents 
after  it,  and  they  are  the  same.  But  the  agents  being 
the  same,  the  events  before  and  after  the  pause  are 
necessarily  the  same ;  for  if  not,  there  are  two  prophe- 
cies, which  is  contrary  to  the  title  in  ch.  i.  1.  The 
agents  and  the  events  being  the  same,  both  before 
and  after  the  pause,  it  follows  that  the  one  part  of  the 
prophecy  is  a  reduplication  of  the  other. 

The  fifth  and  last  reason  we  shall  here  assign  in 
favor  of  reduplication,  is  one  which,  if  it  stood  alone, 
might  justly  be  considered  sufficient  in  itself  to  prove 
it,  and  in  a  profane  work  would  undoubtedly  be  regard- 
ed sufficient  to  establish  it.  It  is,  that  by  the  way  of 
reduplication  we  obtain  a  plan  for  the  prophecy 
15 


338  PLAK   AND  DESIGN. 

simple  and  beautiful,  and  strictly  in  accordance  with 
Scriptural  models.  She  tells  us:  The  prophecy  of 
the  Kevelation  is  one  with  a  double  version.  Its 
unity  is  expressed  by  its  being  contained  in  one  seven- 
sealed  book,  in  the  seven  seals  of  which  there  is  no 
division.  The  doubleness  of  its  version  is  expressed 
by  the  "  silence  in  heaven  about  the  space  of  half 
an  hour,"  dividing  the  representations  of  the  seventh 
seal  from  those  of  the  six  preceding,  thus  forming  a 
first  version  of  what  precedes,  and  a  second  version 
of  what  follows.  The  first  version  is  short,  simple, 
and  regular,  and  more  of  the  nature  of  an  index  of 
contents  to  the  second  and  larger  version.  The 
second  is  long,  complex,  and  irregular,  delivering  the 
prophecy  with  great  fulness  and  with  great  detail. 
The  method  by  which  the  prophet  has  arranged  his 
subject  may  be  best  learned  from  the  first  version  ;  the 
details  of  his  subject  may  be  best  ascertained  from 
the  second.  We  see  that  the  structure  of  the  prophecy 
is  in  the  quaternal  form,  and  that  its  predictions  con- 
cern Four  Dominions.  This  structure  is  pointed  out 
to  us  by  the  living- creatures  who  invite  us  to  "  Come 
and  see  "  the  Four  Dominions  which  the  prophecy  con- 
cerns. These  are  displayed  in  the  pictures  under  the 
first  four  seals.  Four  equestrians  represent  them. 
They  are  described  by  a  few  characteristics,  simply 
but  grandly.  The.  representations  of  the  two  follow- 
ing seals  indicate  the  character  of  the  events.  The 
fifth  seal  describes  them  on  the  one  side  as  being 
persecutions  of  the  church.  The  sixth  seal  describes 
them  on  the  other  side  as  being  judgments  on  the 


PLAN  AND  DESIGN.  339 

enemies  and  victory  of  the  clmrcli.  Sucli  is  the  out- 
line of  the  subject,  the  detail  of  which  is  filled  in  by 
the  representations  of  the  seventh  seal,  which  form 
the  second  version.  'Now  this  plan  is  admirable  for 
its  simplicity,  beauty,  and  perfect  unity  of  design,  as 
also  for  its  Scriptural  character — qualities  which  evi- 
dence it  to  be  the  plan  of  the  prophet ;  and  reduplica- 
tion gives  it.  This  delivery  of  the  plan  is  very  much 
in  favor  of  reduplication.  Eeduplication  gives  us 
what  all  the  wise  men  have  not  been  able  to  discover. 
It  does  not  require  to  be  added  that  there  is  no  plan 
as  yet  discovered,  which  will  vie  in  unity  and  beauty 
of  design  with  this  one  that  reduplication  presents. 

These  we  conceive  are  strong  reasons  for  coming 
to  the  conclusion  that  the  vision  of  John,  like  the 
dream  of  Pharaoh,  Gen.  xli.,  has  been  "  doubled  unto 
him  twice."  What  a  powerful  key  does  this  redu- 
plication put  into  the  hand  of  the  interpreter  !  What 
a  guarantee  does  it  afford  to  the  right  application  of 
the  prophecy  !  John,  upon  this  view  of  his  book,  is 
liis  own  commentator,  and  all  other  commentators 
sink  into  insignificance  beside  the  prophet  himself. 

The  burden  of  the  prophecy  delivered  in  the  first 
six  seals  is  evident,  and  it  is  simple.  It  is  the  contest 
of  the  kingdom  of  God  with  three  dominions,  w^iich, 
on  several  grounds  apart  from  the  symbolic  delinea- 
tions, must  be  concluded  to  be  Roman  dominions ;  the 
oppression  of  this  kingdom  by  these  three  hostile 
powers  for  an  appointed  season  ;  the  judgment  and 
destruction  of  these  hostile  powers,  and  the  complete 
triumph  of  the  kingdom  of  God  as  the  sn]3reme  and 


340  PLAN  AKD  DESIGN. 

V 

everlasting  dominion  of  the  world.  This  burden  is 
equally  divided  between  the  six  seals.  The  first  four 
exhibit  the  combating  dominions ;  the  fifth,  the  king- 
dom of  God  succumbing  under  the  power  of  its  ene- 
mies ;  tlie  sixth,  the  enemy  judged  and  destroyed,  and 
the  complete  triumph  of  this  the  finally  victorious  do- 
minion. The  burden  naturally  ends  here  and  must  end 
here,  for  the  eye  of  prophecy  does  not  pierce  beyond 
this  great  consummation.  The  plan  and  design  of  the 
prophet,  then,  as  exhibited  in  this  first  version,  is  ex- 
tremely simple.  It  comprehends  nothing  more  than 
Four  Dominions,  the  War  waged  between  these,  and 
the  destruction  of  three  of  them,  and  the  Yictoey  and 
everlasting  triumph  of  one  of  them.  It  develops  six 
subjects  ;  each  seal  contains  one ;  the  six  seals  are  a 
table  of  contents  to  the  seventh  seal ;  the  representa- 
tions of  this  seal,  as  will  be  seen,  observing  the  same 
plan  and  design,  re-deliver  this  burden  and  nothing 
more,  in  a  more  expanded  form.  The  burden  is  a 
ver}^  ancient  one  ;  it  dates  from  paradise.  Gen.  iii. 
15  ;  it  was  formally  delivered  by  Daniel,  chs.  ii.  and 
vii.,  and  it  is  caught  up  by  the  last  prophet  of  God, 
the  prophet  of  the  Revelation,  who,  in  a  full,  a  loftier, 
a  richer,  and  a  more  varied  strain  than  Daniel,  pre- 
dicts the  bruising  of  the  serpent's  head  by  the  seed 
of  the  woman,  and  the  eventual  triumph  and  gloiry 
on  earth,  after  a  hard-won  victory  over  the  fourth 
dominion  of  the  world,  of  the  Kingdom  of  the  Son  of 
Man.  Such  is  the  first  version  of  John's  prophecy  ; 
a  detailed  development  of  the  same  grand  subject  is 
presented  in  the  second. 


PLAN  AND   DESIGN.  34:1 

The  silence  at  length  ends,  and  the  celestial 
panorama  rolls  on  once  more  and  attracts  the  intense 
and  wrapt  gaze  of  the  seer.  But  changed  is  the 
scenery  from  visions  of  glory,  blessedness,  and  peace 
to  the  crashing  trumpets  of  war.  Seven  dreadfully- 
sounding  trumpets  are  blowm ;  calamity  and  woe 
come  at  their  bidding  ;  destruction  is  piled  on  destruc- 
tion, nntil  the  final  catastrophe  is  reached.  But  the 
catastrophe  is  that  of  the  preceding  seal,  Avhich 
ushered  in  the  triumph  at  its  close.  It  is  in  vain  to 
enquire  why  the  prophet  has  departed  from  the  order 
he  has  hitherto  observed.  Perhaps  the  accumulation 
of  judgments  is  here  entered  on,  to  present  a  vivid 
contrast  to  the  immediately  foregoing  scene  of  triumph, 
peace,  and  bliss.  Perhaps  the  association  of  the  half 
hour's  silence  with  the  silence  of  incense-offering  in 
the  temple-worship,  suggests  the  array  of  judgments. 
Whatever  be  the  reason  of  the  change,  nothing  can 
be  more  certain  than  that  the  prophet  discards  the 
arrangement  he  has  hitherto  followed.  The  change 
of  order,  however,  is  not  any  evidence  of  change  of 
subject.  It  is  simply  an  evidence  of  that  versatility 
in  representation  which  characterizes  the  Pevelation. 
Having  concisely  developed  his  system  of  handling 
the  subject  before  the  pause,  he  seems  after  it  to 
abandon  himself  wholly  to  fulness  of  representation, 
and  to  give  a  free  reign  to  versatility — to  allow  the 
horses  to  bear  the  chariot  at  will.  But  although  his 
order  is  changed  he  is  still  orderly — nay  very  orderlj^, 
for  now  he  divides  and  subdivides.  Before  li^  was 
general ;  he  now  becomes  particular.      He  displays 


842  PLAN   AND   DESIGN. 

his  regard  to  order  by  setting  the  fourfold  group  the 
conspicuous  body  in  the  first  version  in  the  centre  of 
the  second  in  the  very  same  succession ;  he  defines 
the  restricted  subjection  of  the  conquering  dominion 
and  the  rage  of  the  enemy  depicted  under  the  fifth 
seal  to  be  for  1260  years  ;  he  divides  the  judgments 
of  the  sixth  seal  into  seven  trumj^ets,  symbols  of 
judgments  in  war,  and  the  last  of  these  he  has  sub- 
divided into  seven  vials,  affording  the  details  of  the 
seventh  and  final  judgment,  while  through  the  whole 
of  the  multifarious  visions  which  crowd  this  version 
he  moves  steadily  onwards  to  the  same  grand  climax 
to  which,  in  the  epistles,  he  strove  to  rouse  the  seven 
churches — the  climax  of  victory,  and  he  ends  the  two 
versions  with  the  same  sublime  strains  which  equally 
closes  the  sixth  and  the  seventh  seal.  Let  us,  how- 
ever, take  the  key  of  arrangement  which  he  has  fur- 
nished in  that  part  of  the  prophecy  which  precedes 
the  pause  at  the  end  of  the  sixth  seal ;  we  shall  find 
it  effectual  in  reducing  the  complexity  of  the  visions 
of  the  seventh  seal. 

Let  our  eye  look  for  and  catch  the  fourfold  group, 
for  it  is  round  this  centre  that  the  events  of  this  lofty, 
spirit-stirring,  and  heaven-born  epic  revolve.  Here 
it  is  in  ch.  vii.  and  xiii. 

The  kingdom  of  God  is  first  in  the  series,  as  be- 
fore. The  Woman  clothed  with  the  sun,  with  the 
moon  under  her  feet,  represents  this  kingdom,  as  is 
universally  admitted,  and  as  is  self-evident.  She  be- 
come^ afterwards  the  bride,  the  Lamb's  wife,  ch. 
xxi.  9.     She  is  sadly  persecuted  for  a  season,  and  is 


PLAN   AND   DESIGN.  3^8. 

obliged  to  flee  into  the  wilderness,  wliere  slie  sojourns 
for  1260  days.  This,  a  day  standing  for  a  year  in 
symbolic  prophecy,  prefigures  the  oppression  of  the 
kingdom  of  God  under  the  Homan  dominion,  fj-om 
the  year  A.  D.  533,  when  the  Papal  power  was  first 
founded,  till  A.  D.  1793,  when  the  first  of  the  seven 
vials  of  the  last  judgment  began  its  course,  and  this 
power  was  driven  into  the  wilderness  of  judgment,  in 
which  it  is  exhibited,  with  its  whorish  associate,  in 
chap.  xvii.  3.  But  the  woman,  with  the  glorious  in- 
signia of  the  sun,  moon,  and  crown  of  stars,  bears 
a  man-child,  who  is  "  to  rule  all  nations  with  a  rod 
of  iron,"  ver.  5.  This  is  that  Conqueror,  for  who  else 
can  he  be,  who  appeared  in  the  first  seal,  going  forth 
"  conquering  and  to  conquer."  The  kingdom  of  God, 
then,  is  here  represented  under  a  double  symbol,  and 
exhibited  nnder  the  two  phases  which  it  presents 
throughout  the  book,  of  militant  and  triumphant. 
The  woman,  who  flees  into  the  wilderness,  represents 
it  as  suflering  ;  the  man-child,  "  caught  up  unto  God 
and  to  his  throne,"  as  finally  victorious. 

The  Roman  empire,  the  first  enemy  in  the  order 
of  time,  and  represented  under  the  first  four  seals  by 
the  Horseman  on  the  red  horse,  succeeds  the  repre- 
sentation of  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  appears  under 
the  form  of  a  great  red  Dragon,  having  seven  heads 
and  ten  horns.  The  seven  heads,  keeping  in  view  the 
interpretation  in  ch.  xvii.  9,  prove  it  to  be  a  Roman 
dominion,  while  the  ten  horns  identify  it  with  the 
fourth  beast  of  Daniel,  which  stands  for  the  fourth 
empire  of  the  world,  which  is  the  Roman.     It  is  here 


844:  PLAN   AND   DESIGN. 

represented  as  endeavoring  the  destruction,  in  its  in- 
fancy, of  that  dominion  which  is  destined  to  be  finally 
victorious.  But  the  victory  of  this  is  sure,  for  the 
child  is  "  caught  up  unto  God  and  to  his  throne." 
Christianity,  in  its  judicial  aspect,  represented  by 
Michael,  assails  it  in  the  form  of  four  tremendous 
invasions  of  the  Northern  barbarous  nations,  symbol- 
ized b}^  the  first  four  trumpets,  which  eject  it  out  of 
the  Italian  heaven,  a.  d.  476,  and  cast  it  out  upon 
the  provincial  German  earth.  Loud  shouts  of  tri- 
umph resound  from  the  heavenly  chorus,  vs.  10-12, 
and  celebrate  the  victory  won  by  the  kingdom  of 
God,  which  has  driven  its  enemy  from  its  seat  of 
power  and  pre-eminence  at  Home.  The  Empire 
driven  from  the  Italian  and  metropolitan  heaven^  per- 
secutes the  church  on  the  German  and  provincial 
earth.  The  church  flees  into  the  wilderness  during 
1260  years ;  the  Dragon's  persecution,  however,  is 
not  said  to  last  for  this  period,  the  truth  being,  that 
the  Empire  was,  during  about  300  years  of  this 
time,  in  a  state  of  suspension.  All  reference  to  this 
suspension  of  its  existence,  is  here  omitted,  but  it  is 
formally  represented  under  the  fourth  trumpet,  which 
likewise  prefigures  this,  the  greatest  and  most  signal 
revolution  in  modern  history. 

The  Papacy  follows  the  Empire  in  the  representa- 
tion under  the  form  of  the  Beast,  which  is  said  to 
have  entered  into  the  power,  seat,  and  great  authority 
of  the  Dragon,  cli.  xiii.  2.  If  the  Dragon  be  the 
Empire,  this  characteristic  alone  determines  the  Beast 
to  be  the  Papacy,  for  certainly,  no  other  dominion, 


PLAN   AND   DESIGN.  345 

except  the  Papal,  entered  into  tlie  power,  seat,  and 
great  authority  of  the  Empire.  The  interpretation  in 
chap.  xvii.  demonstrates  the  Beast  there,  which  is  the 
same  with  that  here  described,  to  be  the  Papacy,  as 
has  been  shown  by  many  commentators.  Its  described 
character  as  a  Eoman  temporal  dominion,  the  eighth 
and  last  in  order,  in  combination  with  a  great  eccle- 
siastical dominion,  and  lasting  for  1260  years,  ch. 
xiii.  5,  is  demonstrative  evidence  to  this  effect. 

The  ecclesiastical  dominion,  in  combination  with 
the  above,  makes  the  fourth  member  of  the  group, 
and  is  the  same  as  that  prefigured  by  the  Horseman 
on  the  pale  horse,  who  has  no  insignia  of  authority. 
Its  ecclesiastical  character  is  here  represented,  not  by 
its  having  ten  horns,  the  emblems  of  Koman  temporal 
power,  but  by  its  having  two  horns,  ver.  11,  like  the 
lamb,  Christ,  who  in  his  sacrificial  character  abjured 
temporal  government,  saying,  "  My  kingdom  is  not 
of  this  world,"  John,  xviii.  36.  In  ch.  xviii.  its  eccle- 
siastical nature  is  represented  by  the  character  of  the 
symbol,  a  xcliove^  while  it  is  the  dominion  which  ap- 
pears in  various  places  of  the  book  as  the  false  "projpli- 
et^  which  is  necessarily  the  sign  of  an  ecclesiastical 
dominion.  Its  combination  with  the  dominion  above 
described,  is  plainly  aifirmed  in  the  words,  "  And  he 
exerciseth  all  the  power  of  the  first  beast  before  him," 
ver.  12.  These  words  are  only  applicable  to  the 
Papacy  as  the  head  of  a  temporal  and  spiritual  Em- 
pire. In  ch.  xvii.,  the  combination  of  the  two  domin- 
ions is  symbolized  by  their  union  in  one  compound 
symbol,  a  Beast,  and  a  Whore  riding  on  it. 
15* 


346  pla:n^  and  design. 

Tins  compound  symbol  is  said  to  last  for  forty 
and  two  months,  ver.  5,  wliicli,  reckoning  tliirty  days 
to  a  month,  and  a  day  for  a  year,  in  conformity  with  the 
interpretation  in  Scripture  (Numb.  xiv.  34,  Ezek.  iv. 
6),  are  1260  years.  This  period  commenced  with  the 
publication  of  the  edict  of  the  Emperor  Justinian, 
A.  D.  533,  whose  code  has  been  the  law  for  modern 
Europe,  which  edict  founded  the  spiritual  and  tem- 
poral, but  more  especially  the  spiritual  power  of  the 
Pope,  and  ended  with  the  year  a.  d.  1793,  when  the 
French  revolution  broke  out,  which  introduced  to  the 
world  a  new  era,  fatal  at  once  to  tyranny  and  super- 
stitution,  began  the  course  of  the  seven  vials,  or  the 
lasts  plagues,  and  drove  the  Papacy,  temporal  and 
spiritual,  into  that  wilderness  of  judgment  in  which 
it  is  exhibited  in  ch.  xvii.  This  period,  accordingly, 
is  fixed  by  an  event  correspondent  with  the  terms  of 
the  prophecy,  both  at  its  commencement  and  close, 
and  may  be  regarded  as  demonstratively  proved. 

Such  are  the  four  dominions  as  they  are  repre- 
sented by  the  Four  Horsemen  of  the  first  version. 

The  fifth  seal  represents  the  oppression  and  afflic- 
tion of  the  church.  The  time  is  there  stated  to  be 
appointed  (ch.  vi.  11),  but  it  is  not  defined.  This  is 
done  in  the  full  version  under  the  perfect  seal.  The 
church  is  predicted  to  he  subjected  to  persecution  and 
oppression  for  1260  years,  by  the  representation  made 
of  the  Woman's  fieeing  into  the  w^ilderness  for  1260 
days,  ch.  xii.  6,  14,  and  by  the  Two  Witnesses  pro- 
phesying in  sackcloth,  ch.  xi.  3.  The  same  predic- 
tion is  delivered  in  respect  of  the  oi^pressing  enemy 


PLAN   AND   DESIGN.  3tl:7 

in  cli.  xiii.  5,  in  regard  to  the  Beast,  where  it  is  said 
that  "power  was  given  unto  him  to  continue  for  forty 
and  two  months,"  and  in  ch.  xi.  2,  where  it  is  said  in 
respect  of  the  holy  city,  the  symbol  of  the  kingdom 
of  God,  that  "  it  is  given  unto  the  Gentiles,"  and 
they  shall  '^  tread  it  under  foot  forty  and  two 
months."  This  period,  which  defines  the  continuance 
of  the  subjugation  of  the  kingdom  of  God  under  Ro- 
man power,  occupies  a  prominent  position  in  the  sec- 
ond version.  The  church's  affliction  lasts  during  the 
reign  of  Imperial  and  Papal  power ;  this  reign  ends 
with  the  commencement  of  the  pouring  out  of  the 
last  vials.  The  object  of  these  is,  as  clearly  appears 
from  ch.  xv.,  to  deliver  the  church  and  destroy  its 
enemies.  The  church's  affliction  and  the  power  of 
the  enemy,  naturally  and  necessarily  end  when  these 
begin. 

The  sixth  seal  opens  with  the  judgments  on  the 
enemies  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  Ln  the  seventh  seal 
tliese  are  formally  arranged  under  Seven  Trumpets, 
the  last  of  which  is  subdivided  into  Seven  Yials. 
The  first  four  trumpets  comprehend  the  four  great 
invasions  of  the  barbarians,  the  last  of  which  dissolved 
the  Roman  Empire  in  Italy,  a.  d.  476,  the  temporary 
eclipse  of  whose  power,  between  the  fall  of  the  Em- 
pire in  Italy  and  its  reconstitution  in  Germany  by 
Charlemagne,  a.  d.  800,  is  vividly  represented  by  the 
fourth  trumpet.  The  fifth  trumpet  symbolizes  the 
invasions  of  the  Saracens,  and  the  sixth  that  of  the 
Turks.  The  seventh  trumpet  represents  the  war  which 
the  Son  of  Man  in  person  wages  against  the  Roman 


348  PLAN   AND    DESIGN. 

dominions.  This  trumpet  is  divided  into  seven  vials. 
The  first  of  these  was  poured  out  in  the  French  revo- 
lution of  1793;  the  last,  probably,  in  1848,  and  it  is  to 
be  held  as  now  running  its  course.  The  final  judg- 
ments are  represented  in  other  places  of  the  seventh 
seal.  In  ch.  xix.  11-21,  the  destruction  of  the  Papacy 
and  the  Eomish  church  are  predicted,  under  the  figure 
of  the  casting  of  the  Beast  and  the  False  Prophet  into 
the  lake  of  fire  ;  and  in  ch.  xx,  the  destruction  of  the 
Empire,  after  its  subjection  to  a  series  of  judgments 
symbolized  by  a  chaining  in  the  bottomless  pit  for 
1,000  years,  which  in  this  symbolical  prophecy  is  ne- 
cessarily a  symbolical  period,  and  here  stands  for  a 
comparatively  short  space  of  time,  is  foretold. 

The  sixth  seal  closes  with  the  triumph  of  the 
kingdom  of  God ;  the  seventh  ends  with  the  same 
triumph.  This  great  and  glorious  consummation  is 
represented  in  various  places,  but  more  particularly  in 
the  sublime  vision  which  closes  the  prophecy  in  ch. 
xxi.  and  xxii. 

The  plan  of  the  Kevelation,  then,  is  in  strict  ac- 
cordance with  symbolic  models ;  it  is  reduplicating 
and  quaternal.  Its  subject  is  also  symbolic,  for  it  is 
that  which  forms  the  burden  of  Daniel  and  Zecha- 
ri all's  prophecies,  the  relations  of  the  kingdom  of 
God  to  the  fourth  dominion  of  the  world.  Daniel 
and  Zechariah  divide  this  dominion  into  two  branches, 
which,  by  Daniel,  are  described  as  contemporaneously 
existing,  and  involved  in  one  and  the  same  ruin. 
These  can  only  be  the  Imperial  division  of  the  Roman 
power,  represented  in  Dan.  ch.  vii.  by  the  fourth  beast 


PLAN  AND  DESIGN.  34:9 

itself,  as  it  existed  first  in  Italy  and  thereafter  in 
Germany,  and  the  Papacy,  a  small  temporal  power 
symbolized  by  the  little  horn  on  the  beast  that  "  had 
a  look  more  stout  than  his  fellows,"  that  spake  "  great 
words  against  the  Most  High,"  that  wore  out  the 
saints  of  the  Most  High,  and  that  subdued  them 
under  him  for  1260  years.  John  describes  these  two 
divisions,  also,  but  adds  the  strictly  ecclesiastical 
phase  of  this  dominion,  by  which  he  completes  his 
quaternary,  and  gives  a  full  representation  of  the  sub- 
ject. This  dominion,  this  last  stronghold  of  tyranny 
and  superstition  on  the  earth,  is  predicted  to  be 
destroyed,  and  a  glorious  kingdom  to  occupy  its  place, 
which  is  to  endure  through  endless  ages.  Symbolic 
prophecy  knows  no  destruction  of  the  material  world  ; 
it  concerns  itself  solely  with  the  political.  This  shall 
be  destroyed  and  a  new  one  created.  The  kingdom 
of  the  saints  is  the  new  heavens  and  the  new  earth, 
which  is  to  be  set  up  on  eternal  foundations.  When 
this  glorious  work  is  accomplished,  righteousness  and 
truth  will  walk  the  earth  in  majesty  and  in  triumph  ; 
they  will  sit  down  upon  thrones,  and  place  the  nations 
under  blissful  sceptres  ;  joy  and  peace,  flapping  their 
radiant  wings,  will  sally  forth  and  hover  stationary 
over  a  world  emancipated  and  redeemed.  This  is  the 
burden  of  the  song  which  the  prophet  sings  in  mystic, 
but  not  in  inarticulate,  in  sublime  and  immortal 
strains.  He  sings  the  praise  of  virtue.  He  celebrates 
her  victory  in  the  great  Olympic  race,  the  stadium  of 
which  is  the  world,  for  about  2,000  years  ;  the  compet- 
itors in  the  race,  giant  world-powers ;  the  goal  the  end 


350  PLAK  AND  DESIGN. 

of  the  age.  Yirtue  wins  the  prize  in  the  contest ;  she 
binds  upon  her  brows  imperishable  laurels  ;  she  sits 
down  on  an  eternal  throne,  and  she  wears  the  crown 
of  empire  forever.  But  the  song  is  a  prophecy.  The 
race  is  still  to  be  run  when  the  prophet  assumes  the 
lyre  ;  yet  he  describes  its  changes  and  its  vicissitudes 
with  the  accuracy  of  an  historian.  Within  the  sacred 
precinct  of  the  Kevelation,  Poetry,  Prophecy,  and 
History  may  be  seen  to  join  hand  in  hand,  and  to  talk 
words  together;  a  group  that  have  never  been  seen 
together  except  on  the  summit  of  inspiration. 


SYXOPTICAL  VIEW  OF  THE  IKTEEPKE- 
TATIO^". 

The  two  mam  and  distinctive  features,  in  so  far  as 
the  form  of  the  proj^hecy  is  concerned,  of  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  Revelation  submitted  in  the  foregoing 
pages,  may  be  stated  as  follows : 

1,9^.  The  prophecy  is  delivered  in  a  double  ver- 
sion. (See  under  Prop.  3d.)  It  is  unnecessary  to 
state  how  valuable  this  principle  is  to  the  elimination 
of  the  meaning.  The  one  version  occupies  the  place 
of  an  interpreter  to  the  other,  and  the  prophecy  to  a 
certain  extent,  mterjyreU  itself. 

2d.  The  prophecy  is  constructed  in  the  quaterxal 
FORM.  (See  under  Prop.  4th.)  By  the  aid  of  this 
principle,  the  various  pictures  of  the  seven-sealed 
book  may  be  ranged  under  four  headings.  We  are 
thus  enabled  to  institute  a  comparison  between  them  ; 
light  is  thrown  on  what  is  dark,  and  confusion  resolves 
itself  into  order. 

So  far  as  we  are  aware,  these  principles  have  not 
yet  been  applied  to  the  Book  of  Revelations,  and  if 
they  are  true  and  necessary  to  the  right  interpreta- 
tion, is  it  at  all  wonderful  that  this  has  not  yet  been 
rendered  ? 


S54:  SYNOPTICAL   VIEW. 

It  appears  to  us  that  these  two  principles  go  far  to 
unlock  the  chambers  of  imagery  of  tlr's  sublime 
prophecy.  Under  their  application  the  prophecy 
exhibits  an  admirable  sim/plicity  combined  with  an 
exquisite  symmetry  in  all  its  parts.  Perhaps  in  the 
end  it  will  be  found  that  the  loise  conception  and  de- 
sign manifested  in  the  book  are  yet  more  astonishing 
than  the  splendor  of  its  imagery.  Rivalling  the 
highest  poetry,  does  it  exhibit  all  the  exactitude  of  ^ 
mathematical  science  in  its  design  and  structure  ?  If 
so,  and  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  it  does  this, 
it  forms  a  wonderful  instance  of  the  wisdom  and 
goodness  of  God,  who  has  thus  delivered  to  His 
people  a  book  to  guide  and  cheer  their  path  by  the 
figures  of  a  glowing  imagery,  which,  in  the  end,  resolve 
themselves  into  problems  of  demonstrable  certainty 
and  of  prophetic  import,  attesting  at  once  the  divinity 
of  His  Word  and  His  government  of  the  world. 

As  a  HELP  or  key  to  the  understanding  of  the 
book,  we  beg  to  submit  and  prove  the  following 
propositions. 

PROPOSITIONS  : 

1st  Prop. — The  Book  of  Pevelations  is  a  prophecy 
written  in  the  symholical  language  of  8cri2?ture^  which 
language  is  one  and  uniform,  as  the  interpretations 
rendered  in  Scripture  show  it  to  be. 

2d  Prop. — It  is  a  prophecy  distinguished  by  unity 
of  design.  This  is  evident  from  its  being  contained 
in  a  seven-sealed  book  (ch.  v.  1),  the  pictures  of 
which  constitute  the  prophecy  (ch.  vi. — viii.  1),  and  it 


SYNOPTICAL   VIEW.  355 

maj  also  be  concluded  on  tlie  ground  that  the  other 
symbolical  prophecies  of  Scripture  manifest  this 
principle  (Dan.  ch.  ii.,  vii.,  viii.     Zech.  vi.) 

3d  Pkop. — It  exhibits  the  feature  of  Tedii]plicatio7i^ 
or  it  contains  a  double  version  of  itself,  for  the  follow- 
ing reasons :  Firstly,  because  this  also  is  a  feature  of 
symbolical  representation,  as  is  evident  from  Gen. 
xli.  32,  where  the  principle  is  distinctly  enunciated, 
and  from  its  being  displayed  by  Daniel  in  his  great 
prophecy  regarding  the  four  great  empires  of  the 
world  (ch.  ii.,  ch.  vii.)  and  elsewhere,  and  secondly, 
because  the  book  itself  plainly  shows  it — a  first  ver- 
sion terminating  at  ch.  vii.  1 — for  the  whole  subject 
of  the  prophecy  there  takes  end,  and  is  repeated  in 
the  remaining  portion  of  the  book,  and  "  a  silence  in 
heaven  about  the  sj)ace  of  half  an  hour  '■  occurring  at 
this  place  (ch.  viii.  1),  which  silence  is  not  explicable 
except  on  the  ground  that  it  divides  a  first  version 
from  a  second. 

4:th  Prop. — It  is  constructed  in  the  form  of  a 
Quaternary,  or  it  presents  its  subject  in  a  fourfold 
group,  because  it  is  the  practice  of  the  symbolic 
prophets  to  construct  their  prophecies  in  this  form 
(Dan.  ii.,  vii.  Zech.  vi.),  and  because  the  four  beasts 
or  livino;-creatures  announce  or  introduce  four  sub- 
jects  (ch.  vi.  1-8),  contained  in  the  representations 
of  the  first  four  seals,  wliich  four  subjects,  from  this 
special  introduction,  are  to  be  held  on  the  ground  of 
miity  of  design  (Prop.  2),  as  well  as  of  the  analogy 
of  Dan.  ch.  vii.,  to  be  all  the  subjects  which  the 
prophecy  predicts   concerning.     This  proposition   is 


356  SYNOPTICAL  VIEW. 

also  a  corollary  from  the  preceding  one,  for  if  the 
prophecy  has  a  double  version,  it  contains  no  more 
than  four  subjects,  no  more  than  four  being  in  the 
first  version,  which  must  be  held  to  end  with  ch.  vii. 

5th  Pkop. — It  is  a  prophecy  regarding  political 
dominions  and  events  only;  Firstly^  because  the  sym- 
bolic language  in  which  it  is  couched,  on  a  legitimate 
explication  of  its  meaning  derived  from  Scripture, 
only  bears  this  reference.  Secondly^  because  the  four 
beasts  or  living-creatures  introduce  the  four  subjects 
which  the  prophecy  concerns  (Prop.  4)  in  a  manner 
precisely  similar  to  the  four  winds  of  Daniel  ch.  vii. 
2,  and  the  whole  structure  of  the  prophecy  exhibits 
an  analogy  both  in  manner  and  matter  to  the  prophecy 
of  Daniel  ch.  ii.  and  vii.,  which  is  entirely  political 
in  its  bearing.  Thirdly^  because  there  is  an  inter- 
pretation rendered  in  the  book  (ch.  xvii.  ^-18),  which 
is  entirely  political,  and  which  interpretation  must 
be  held  an  example  to  be  followed  ;  and  Fourthly ^  it 
being  certain  \h.2X  parts  of  the  pro]3hecy  are  political, 
a  regard  to  unity  of  design  (Prop.  2)  necessitates  the 
conclusion  that  it  is  all  political. 

6th  Prop. — The  political  dominions  and  events 
fredicted  of  are  all  of  the  first  magnitude^  because  the 
symbolic  prophecies  of  Scripture  are  restricted  to 
dominions  and  events  of  this  kind  (Dan.  passim  Zech.), 
and  because  the  burden  of  the  prophecy  as  is  undeni- 
able is  to  i^redict  the  triumph  of  the  Kingdom  of  God 
over  certain  worldly  dominions  which  must  be  great, 
because  it  is  only  such  which  can  enter  the  lists  with 
it  for  that  universal  empire  which  is  its  destiny. 


SYNOrXICAL  VIEW.  357 

Ttli  Pkop. — Of  the  four  dominions  wliicli  the  pro- 
phecy concerns  (Prop.  4),  three  are  Itoman^  and  one 
is  the  Kingdom  of  God^  which  latter  clause  of  the 
proposition  requires  no  proof.  Three  dominions  are 
to  be  held  Roman  for  the  following  reasons :  1st.  It 
is  acknowledged  that  the  iron  and  clay  of  the  Image 
(Dan.  ch.  ii.  40 — 43)  and  the  fourth  Beast  (Dan.  ch. 
vii.  23 — 25),  as  is  evident  from  the  interpretations, 
stand  for  the  Roman  dominion.  It  is  also  generally 
acknowledged  that  the  fourth  chariot  of  Zechariah  ch. 
vi.  6,  7,  stands  for  this  dominion,  likewise.  The  appli- 
cation which  has  been  made  of  these  prophecies  in  the 
above  sense  may  be  regarded  as  a  certain  ti*uth.  It 
is  known  that  the  prophet  of  the  Revelation  follows 
these  prophets,  as  well  in  the  selection  of  his  imagery 
as  his  subject  while  there  is  no  ground  to  suppose  that 
he  departs  from  them  in  any  respect.  For  this  reason, 
it  is  to  be  held  that  he  predicts  only  of  the  Roman 
dominion  as  the  antagonist  of  the  Kingdom  of  God — 
Daniel  and  Zechariah,  whom  he  follows,  not  recog- 
nizing any  other.  2d.  Daniel  predicts  of  the  Roman 
dominion  in  two  branches,  at  the  crisis  of  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  Kingdom  of  God  in  the  world,  which 
two  branches  are  represented  by  the  beast  itself  and 
by  the  little  horn  (Dan.  ch.  vii.  23—26).  The  prophet 
of  the  Revelation  predicts  of  the  same  crisis,  and 
must  therefore  predict  of  the  Roman  dominion  in  two 
branches  at  least,  for  his  prophecy  is  more  enlarged 
than  that  of  Daniel ;  but  a  third  dominion  mentioned 
by  him  is  in  combination  with  one  of  the  others  (Ch. 
'xiii.,  xvii.),  so  that  three  dominions  are  Roman,  which, 


358  SYNOPTICAL   VIEW. 

with  the  Kingdom  of  God,  the  fourth,  are  all  the 
dominions  in  the  book  (Prop.  4th).  2d.  Ten  horns 
are  symbols  apj^Iied  by  Daniel  to  certain  divisions  of 
the  Roman  power  (Dan.  ch.  vii.  24).  Two  of  the 
dominions  in  the  Revelations  have  this  characteristic 
attached  to  them  (Ch.  xii.  3,  xiii.  1),  on  which  account 
they  are  to  be  held  to  be  Roman,  and  a  third  is  in 
combination  with  one  of  them  (Ch.  xiii.,xvii),  so  that 
three  are  Roman.  4th.  Seven  heads  are  interpreted 
to  be  seven  mountains,  an  unmistakable  sign  of  Rome, 
which  no  sophistry  can  evade ;  and  this  sign  is  ap- 
plied to  two  of  the  dominions  by  the  interpreting 
angel,  so  that  two  are  necessarily  Roman  (Ch.  xvii. 
9) ;  but  the  same  sign  is  attached  to  a  third  dominion 
represented  by  the  dragon  (Ch.  xii.  3),  so  that  three 
are  Roman,  which,  with  the  Kingdom  of  God,  are  all 
the  dominions  in  the  book  (Prop.  4th). 

8th  Pkop. — ^\\^jplan  of  the  prophecy  is  to  deliver 
itself  in  the  form  of  pictures  in  a  seven-sealed  book 
(Comp.  ch.  i.  1 :  v.  1,  7 ;  vi. — viii.  1),  in  a  double 
version,  the  first  being  separated  from  the  second  by 
a  silence  in  heaven  about  the  space  of  half  an  hour 
(Ch.  viii.  1). 

9th  Pkop. — Th^iolot  developed  by  the  pictures  of 
the  seven-sealed  book  is  the  Wak  waged  by  the  King- 
dom OF  God  against  the  Roman  Dominion  in  its  three 
forms,  viz:  Imperial,  Papal,  and  Ecclesiastical. 
This  plot  is  developed  in  an  indicial  and  synoptical 
manner  by  the  representations  as  follows  in  the 


SYNOPTICAL   TIEW.  359 

FIRST  VERSION. 

FIRST  SEAL.     Ch.  vi.  1,  2. 

UBt  f  orse  anb  giber.  j^iit^bom  of  (§ab, 

SECOND  SEAL.     Ch.  vi.  3,  4. 

gcb  f  orse  anb  ^liber.  gomait  (Bmpirf. 

THIRD  SEAL.     Ch.  vi.  .5,  6. 

^Isch  f  orse  anb  gibw:.  gomatt  |apacg. 

FOURTH  SEAL.     Ch.  vi.  7,  8. 
gale  fcrsc  aitb  giber.  gomisb  C^urc^. 

FIFTH  SEAL.     Ch.  vi.  9-11. 

Souls  of  the  Martyrs  under        Oppression  of  the  Kingdom  of 
THE  Altar,  God    for    an     appointed    season, 

which  in  the  second  version  is 
defined  to  be  1260  years,  and 
Promise  of  final  vengeance  and 
victory  to  its  downtrodden  and 
persecuted  cause. 

SIXTH  SEAL.     Ch.  vi.  12— vii.  17. 

First  Pakt. 

A  Violent  Tempest.  Judgments  on  the  Roman  Ene- 

MY,  as  represented  in  the  second, 
^  third,  and  fourth  seals,  Imperlil, 

Papal,  and  Ecclesiastical. 


360  synoptical  view. 

Second  Part. 

Sealing  of  the  Tribes  of  Is-        Security  of  the  Kingdom  op 
BAEL,  God  during  the  Judgments. 

Third  Part. 

Scene    of    Peace,    Happiness,        Triumph  of  the  Kingdom  op 
AND  Glory.  God  as  the  Everlasting  Dominion 

on  earth,  when  in  the  words  of 
Daniel,  vii.  27.  "  And  the  king- 
dom and  dominion,  and  the  great- 
ness of  the  kingdom  under  the 
whole  heaven,  shall  be  given  to 
the  people  of  the  saints  of  the 
Most  High,  whose  kingdom  is  an 
everlasting  kingdom,  and  all  do- 
minions shall  serve  and  obey  him." 


SECOND  VERSION. 

FIRST  SEAL  REDUPLICATED.     Ch.  xii. 

Wiommx,  S^Ije  llingbom  of  (^oin* 

SECOND  SEAL  REDUPLICATED.     Ch.  xii. 

gragoiT.  S^^c  '^ammi  Empire. 

THIRD  SEAL  REDUPLICATED.     Ch.  xiii. 
FOURTH  SEAL  REDUPLICATED. ,  Ch.  xiii. 


SYNOPTICAL  VIEW. 


361 


FIFTH  SEAL  REDUPLICATED. 


Flight  of  the  "Woman  into  the 
Wilderness  for  1260  days,  ch. 
xii.  Prophesying  of  the  Two  Wit- 
nesses in  Sackcloth,  for  1260 
days,  chap.  xi. 


Oppression  op  the  Kingdom  op 
God  for  1260  Years. 


SIXTH  SEAL  REDUPLICATED. 


FiKST  Pakt. 


Seten  Trumpets,  ch.  viii. — xi. 
Seven  Vials,  ch.  xvi. 

Ten-horned  Beast  and  Whore 
IN  Wilderness,  ch.  xvii.  Cast- 
ing of  Beast  and  False  Prophet 

INTO  LAKE  OF  FIRE,  ch.  xix.  CAST- 
ING OF  THE  Dragon  into  Bottom- 
less Pit  and  Lake  op  Fire,  ch.  xx. 
Fall  of  Babylon,  ch.  xviii. 


Judgments  on  the  Koman  Do- 
minion, Imperial,  Papal,  and  Ec- 
clesiastical. 

Destruction  of  the  Roman  Do- 
minion, Imperial,  Papal,  and 
Ecclesiastical. 


Second  Paet. 

Visions    op  ch.  xiv.   and    xv.        Security    op  the  Church  op 
Protection    of  the  Woman,  ch.     God. 
xii.  6,  14,  and  of  the  Two  Wit- 
nesses, ch.  xi.  4,  5. 

Third  Part. 


The  New  Heaven,  and  New 
Earth,  and  the  New  Jerusalem, 
ch.  xxi.  and  xxii. 


Final  Triumph  and  Establish- 
ment op  the  Kingdom  of  God  on 
Earth. 


